t 


4-9. 


ctf  4. 

PRINCETON,  N.  J.  ^ 


Presented  by  ""Dv"'.  S-  <S/.-Vt7\\  \on  ♦ 


BT  715  . G664 
Cook,  E.  W. 

Theory  of  the  moral  system 


t 


K 


f 


\ 


IN  ITS  RELATIONS  TO  THE 


REDEMPTION 


OF 


ZBEITSTG-S. 


BY  REV.  E.  W.  COOK,  A.  M. 


UUKL1NGTON,  VT. : 

free:  press  association, 

1890. 


/ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/theoryofmoralsysOOcook 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION. 


The  preface  to  the  first  edition  contained  among  other  things  the  fol¬ 
lowing: 

“  An  outline  of  the  moral  system  as  developed  in  the  following  pages 

was  first  published  in  the  Hartford  Religious  Herald,  Dec.  26,  1845.  Since 

that  time,  the  author  has  been  expanding  it  according  as  inclination 

prompted,  or  the  intervals  of  professional  duty  have  afforded  leisure  for 

the  work,  until  it  has  assumed  the  present  form.  It  is  written  mainly 

for  the  common  mind;  and  aims,  therefore,  not  to  lie  metaphysical  in  its 
$ 

statements,  but  to  present  matters  in  their  plainest  and  simplest  aspect. 

Should  this  attempt  to  grapple  with  the  great  questions  discussed  be 
deemed  unsatisfactory,  it  will  certainly  be  less  strange  than  an  opposite 
result;  for  no  effort  in  this  direction  has  ever  yet  been  regarded  as  suc¬ 
cessful.  That  it  will  secure  for  itself,  therefore,  the  general  assent,  is  too 
much  to  be  expected;  while  still  the  hope  is  indulged,  that  it  will  be 
found  to  indicate  a  somewhat  different  method  of  exploration  than  has 
hitherto  been  attempted,  worthy  of  being  followed  up  by  other  and  abler 
minds.” 

Since  the  first  edition  of  this  book  was  issued  some  thirty  years  ago, 
several  incidents  have  occurred  in  the  experience  of  the  writer  showing 
the  great  and  growing  need  of  such  a  work  as  lie  lias  here  undertaken. 

Not  long  since  the  author  found  himself  a  member  of  an  ecclesiastical 
council  in  Wisconsin,  for  the  installation  of  a  young  theological  student 
just  graduated  from  the  theological  seminary  in  Chicago.  In  the  ex¬ 
amination  of  the  candidate,  the  doctrine  was  advanced  by  him  that  men 
become  sinners  from  tlieir  connection  with  sinful  Adam.  The  question 
was  then  asked ,  ‘‘How  would  you  defend  the  benevolence  of  God  in 
connecting  the  whole  human  race  with  a  depraved  ancestor,  by  virtue  of 
which  connection  he  pours  one  stream  of  moral  pollution  down  through 
the  entire  race,  laying  in  this  connection  the  foundation  of  their  sinful¬ 
ness,  and  then  damns  men  eternally  for  being  shiners P”  Theanswer  was: 
“  I  never  did  quite  understand  that.”  How  many  of  the  graduates  of 
our  theological  seminaries  to-day  can  answer  this  objection  satisfactorily? 
No  theological  system  which  has  yet  been  given  to  the  world,  solves  this 
difficulty  as  it  lies  in  the  common  mind. 


4 


The  writer  was  led  to  ask  the  above  question,  not  with  the  intention 
of  embarrassing  the  candidate,  but  because  it  was  the  exact  difficulty 
which  confronted  him  in  his  Seminary  course,  and  well  nigh  drove  him 
from  the  ministry,  and  which  laid  the  foundation  of  this  book.  To 
preach  the  gospel  with  such  a  terrific  objection  to  the  evangelical  system 
remaining  unanswered,  would  have  been  for  him  impossible.  And  yet 
this  doctrine  lies  in  the  minds  of  the  mass  of  our  evangelical  church 
members,  precisely  in  the  revolting  shape  in  which  it  has  just  been  stated; 
and  to  this  it  is  believed,  is  to  be  attributed,  more  than  to  any  other  one 
thing,  the  wave  of  Universalism  which  is  now  sweeping  over  the  churches. 
The  feeling  is  that  the  doctrine  of  Hereditary  Depravity  or  of  Endless 
Punishment  must  be  given  up.  They  are  giving  up  the  latter. 

The  writer  was  once  called  to  become  a  settled  pastor,  arid  the  council 
for  his  installation  came  together,  and  the  question  was  asked, — “  Do  you 
accex)t  the  creed  of  this  church?”  The  creed  contained  this  statement, — 
“We  believe  that,  in  consequence  of  the  first  apostasy,  the  heart  of  man 
is,  etc.”  The  candidate  assented  to  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity,  but 
could  not  assent  to  tire  declared  reason  of  it — the  connection  of  the  human 
race  with  sinful  Adam.  At  once  heresy  was  scented,  the  candidate  was 
refused  installation,  and  a  second  council  was  called  a  fortnight  later, 
doubled  in  numbers.  In  the  mean  time  the  candidate  prepared  a  state¬ 
ment  of  his  views  upon  the  doctrine  in  question  as  they  appear  in  this 
book;  the  larger  council  assembled ,  and  settled  him  by  a  unanimous  vote. 
This  matter  is  treated  in  the  chapter  on  the  Occasion  of  Sin  and  in  Ap¬ 
pendix  A. 

At  the  close  of  a  preaching  service  in  one  of  the  New  York  ship-yards, 
in  which  the  writer  had  been  discoursing  on  the  benevolence  of  God,  a 
sturdy  carpenter  came  forward  with  the  question, — “  If  God  is  so  good, 
why  did  he  not  redeem  the  angels  ?”  showing  that  the  uneducated  mind 
ponders  these  matters.  This  question  of  the  ship-carpenter  is  especially 
treated  in  the  progress  of  this  work,  and  made  the  topic  of  a  distinct 
section. 

The  mournful  utterance  of  the  late  beloved  Barnes,  of  Philadelphia, 
so  often  quoted,  is  a  practical  illustration  of  the  fact  that,  even  to  serious 
and  devout  minds,  the  evangelical  system  as  they  apprehend  it,  is  bur¬ 
dened  with  tremendous  difficulties  which  have  never  yet,  to  their  minds, 
been  satisfactorily  met.  It  was  no  superficial  experience  which  wrung 
from  him  that  melancholy  avowal, — “  I  see  no  light  whatever.  I  see  not 


5 

one  ray  to  disclose  to  me  why  sin  came  into  the  world,  why  the  earth  is 
strewn  with  the  dying  and  the  dead,  and  why  men  must  suffer  to  all 
eternity.  I  have  never  seen  a  particle  of  light  thrown  on  these  subjects 
that  lias  given  a  moment’s  ease  to  my  tortured  mind.  It  is  all  dark,  dark, 
dark  to  my  soul,  and  I  cannot  disguise  it.” 

The  serious  fact  is  that  the  difficulties  to  which  he  alludes  inhere  in 
the  very  system  of  evangelical  truth  as  now  accepted,  and  in  the  state¬ 
ments  of  the  Bible  itself  as  now  apprehended.  Obviously  to  quote 
scripture  to  such  a  one  is  useless,  for  his  very  trouble  is  with  his  view  of 
its  utterances.  Evidently  the  only  way  to  meet  the  difficulties  of  one 
who  is  determined  to  hold  fast  to  the  word  of  God,  is  to  go  back  of  his 
understanding  of  the  Bible,  and  find  some  solid  ground  for  argument  in 
the  “  absolute  and  unchanging  necessities  of  moral  government,”  in  the 
nature  of  free,  moral  agency,  in  the  necessary  relations  of  God  to  the 
universe  as  its  Moral  Governor,  and  especially  in  the  finding  of  some 
great,  possible  plan  of  the  universe  which  shall  both  comprehend  and 
explain  these  Bible  doctrines.  Such  has  been  the  effort  of  the  writer  in 
this  book,  with  the  conviction  that  to  meet  such  conscientious  difficulties 
and  doubtings  of  Christian  men,  was  worth  the  effort  of  a  life-time. 

Additional  interest  will  lie  imparted  to  this  book  from  the  fact  that 
it  comes  before  the  public  at  a  time  when  the  entire  system  of  doctrine 
contained  in  the  Assembly’s  Catechism  is  coming  up  for  discussion  and 
revision,  as  it  will  at  the  next  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Body.  Consequently  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  human  sinfulness, 
hereditary  depravity,  the  origin  of  sin,  divine  limitations,  divine  fore¬ 
knowledge,  foreordination  and  election,  the  moral  and  governmental 
theories  of  the  atonement,  the  doctrines  of  future  probation,  restoration, 
annihilation  and  endless  punishment,  are  all  coming  up  for  new  and  dis¬ 
tinct  consideration.  The  present  volume  discusses  each  of  these  doc¬ 
trines,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  and  some  of  the  more  important  and 
fundamental  ones,  especially  the  origin  of  sin  and  the  doctrine  of  election 
from  a  new  and  entirely  original  standpoint.  On  this  account  the  book 
is  commended  to  the  notice  of  the  Presbyterian  denomination  generally. 

The  four  points  to  which  the  author  attaches  the  most  importance, 
and  which,  if  accepted,  will,  it  is  believed,  modify  the  evangelical  system 
fundamentally  and  favorably,  are  the  following: 

1.  That  the  moral  system  is  in  its  infancy;  and  that  God  is  just  now 


6 

laying  the  foundations  of  a  moral  universe  that  is  to  go  on  expanding  and 
enlarging  eternally. 

2.  That  the  occasion  of  sin  is  found  in  the  necessary  nature  of  free 
agency — in  the  innate  love  of  conscious  freedom  subjected  to  the  necessary 
restraints  of  law  and  government;  and  is  inseparable,  therefore,  from  the 

nature  of  all  moral  beings  who  either  have  been  or  can  be  created,  so  that 

\ 

there  will  be,  with  the  endless  enlargement  of  the  moral  universe, an  end¬ 
less  tendency,  in  all  newly  created  beings,  to  break  away  from  the  con¬ 
trol  of  the  Almighty,  and  defy  his  authority. 

3.  That  right  here  is  found  the  inevitable  necessity  for  endless  pun¬ 
ishment,  namely,  that  an  endlessly  increasing  universe  can  in  no  way  be 
established  without  it;  so  that  the  hell  of  the  Bible  is  seen  to  be  the  inev¬ 
itable  exigency  of  an  endless  administration  over  an  endless  universe. 

4.  Doing  away  with  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity  as  usually 
apprehended,  by  shifting  the  occasion  of  human  sinfulness  from  the  con¬ 
nection  of  the  race  with  sinful  Adam,  over  to  this  universal  occasion  of 
sin;  thus  getting  rid  of  one  of  the  most  troublesome  objections  to  the 
evangelical  system. 

It  is  hoped  that  this  attempt  to  grapple  with  the  more  serious  diffi¬ 
culties  of  the  system  of  evangelical  truth,  and  which  has  been  with  the 
author  a  life  work,  may  prove  as  helpful  to  others  as  it  has  been  to  him¬ 
self. 

E.  W.  C. 

Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 


V 


/ 


CONTENTS. 


PART  FIRST. 

THE  UNIVERSE  PAST  AND  PRESENT. 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE. 


Chap.  I. — The  material  universe . . . .  17 

See.  1 .  The  creation  of  matter . . . . . .  17 

See.  2.  Mundane  hypothesis _ _ _  19 

Chap.  II. — Benevolence  of  this  Moral  System.. _ _  22 


Chap.  III. — The  Fallen  Angels . . . . .  24 

See.  1.  When  were  they  created  ? . . .  24 

Infancy  of  the  moral  system. 

Sec.  2.  Their  original  constitution _ 29 

See.  8.  Circumstances  of  their  creation . . .  80 

See.  Jf.  Why  did  they  sin  ? _ _ _ _ _ 80 

Origin  of  Sin _ 34 

Practical  Points _ 38 

See.  5.  Their  probation . . 39 

Sec.  8.  Motives _ _ _ _ _ _ _  42 

Sec.  7.  Why  were  they  not  redeemed? _  48 

Sec.  8.  Their  punishment _  50 


Chap.  IV.— Man _ 

Sec.  1.  Connection  with  a  physical  Body 
See.  2.  Temptation  by  malignant  beings . 

1 .  A  personal  devil . . . . 

2.  Temptation  in  Eden . . 

3.  Benevolence  of  temptation _ 

Sec.  3.  The  parental  relation _ _ 

Sec.  4.  The  conditions  of  infancy. . . 


51 

53 

58 

58 

58 

60 

62 

63 


8 


PAGE. 


Death  injfrifancy . . .  64 

Sec.  5.  Other  aspects  of  human  probation . . .  65 

Chap.  V. — The  Unfallen  Angels _  68 


PART  SECOND. 


THE  FUTURE  UNIVERSE. 


Chap.  I. — The  Extent,  Duration,  and  Enlargement  of  the  Future 

Universe _ _ _ ...  75 

Chap.  II. — Sin  in  its  relations  to  God’s  Moral  Government,  and  to 

the  Future  and  Endless  Universe _  7*. 

Sec.  1.  The  liability,  tendency  and  temptation  to  sin  endless.-  78 

Objections. 


1.  This  would  make  sin  a  matter  of  course _ _  78 

Remorse _  70 

2.  There  was  no  occasion  of  sin  in  Adam _  81 

3.  The  unfallen  angels  have  not  sinned _  82 

4.  Christ  must  have  had  in  Him  an  occasion  of  sin _  83 

5.  This  view  involves  self-denial  on  the  part  of  the 

Almighty _ 85 

Sec.  2.  How  can  the  future  universe  be  saved  from  apostasy..  85 

1.  Not  by  the  mere  exertion  of  divine  power _  85 

2.  Only  through  the  influence  of  motives _  87 

Sec.  3.  God’s  dealings  with  sin  in  the  way  of  judgment _  89 

1.  God’s  past  dealings  with  sin _  89 

2.  God’s  present  dealings  with  sin _ 90 

3.  God’s  dealings  with  sin  hereafter _  91 

Sec.  if.  The  Object  of  God  in  his  fearful  dealings  with  the 

wicked _ 92 

Sec.  5.  How  long  will  punishment  continue _  94 

1.  Endless  punishment  possible _  95 

2.  Endless  punishment  probable _  96 

3.  Endless  punishment  certain  and  inevitable _  100 

(1.)  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  God . . . . . .  100 

(2.)  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  law .  102 


9 


PAGE. 

(3.)  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  the  Atonement _  103 

(4.)  The  harmony  of  the  divine  administration  neces¬ 
sitates  endless  penalty _  105 

(5.)  The  endless  punishment  of  the  sinner  certain  be¬ 
cause  nothing  more  can  be  done  for  him _  106 

Doctrine  of  the  Restorationists. 

a.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  the  event  of  death  _  108 

b.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  suffering _  109 

c.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  the  exertion  of 

Divine  power _  113 

d.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  some  new  applica¬ 

tion  of  the  Atonement _ _  114 

e.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  a  more  favorable 

probation _ _ 115 

/.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  the  nse  of  stronger 

motives _  116 

g.  All  the  probable  surroundings  after  death  of  one 
who  has  died  in  impenitence  are  adverse  to  the 
doctrine  of  Restoration _ _  120 

Objection — Condition  of  the  Heathen. 

Practical  effects  of  the  system  of  Restorationism. 

a.  It  tempts  men  to  continue  in  rebellion  against  God.  125 

b.  The  entire  scheme  is  irrational _ 125 

Preaching  the  Gospel  in  Hell. 

c.  Melancholy  position  of  prominent  men  who  have  ad¬ 

vocated  this  doctrine,  should  it  turn  out  to  be  false  128 

(6.)  The  endless  confinement  of  the  sinner  inevitable  be¬ 
cause  nothing  else  can  be  done  with  him _  128 

a.  Nothing  would  be  gained  by  his  release _  128 

b.  The  offer  of  salvation  in  hell  would  be  rejected _  128 

c.  The  annihilation  of  the  wicked  impossible _  129 

d.  Endless  freedom  while  sinning  impossible _  129 

e.  The  endless  confinement  of  the  sinner  the  only  alter¬ 

native . . 130 


10 


PAGE. 

Recap  it 1 1  lo  tion. 

Sec.  6.  The  grand  dilemma. — Hell  or  no  Moral  System _  131 

Sec.  7.  Benevolence  of  this  moral  system... . . . .  ...  133 

Sec.  S.  Objections - - - -  134 

1.  You  would  not  punish  your  child  eternally _  133 

2.  If  my  friends  are  to  be  lost  I  should  desire  to  be  with 

them _ _ _ —  186 

3.  We  cannot  be  happy  in  heaven,  knowing  that  our 

friends  are  suffering _  137 

4.  The  sins  merely  of  a  life-time  cannot  merit  an  eternity 

of  punishment. _ 137 

5.  A  finite  being  cannot  commit  an  infinite  sin _  138 

6.  All  punishment  is  for  the  reformation  of  the  offender.  138 

7.  A  progressive  system  like  ours  will  cure  itself _  139 

8.  The  system  of  naturalism _ 140 

9.  The  doctrine  of  annihilation _  141 

10.  To  create  beings  knowing  that  they  will  be  lost  can¬ 

not  be  benevolent _ 143 

11.  The  system  contained  in  this  book  involves  the  sacrifice 

of  one  class  of  moral  beings  for  the  benefit  of  another.  144 

12.  Endless  penalty  renders  the  character  of  the  Almighty 

repulsive _ , _  .  144 

13.  The  Bible  employs  imagery  so  dreadful  as  to  be  absurd  146 

Conclusion. 

Chap.  III. — The  Governmental  Theory  of  the  Atonement. _  149 

Sec.  1.  The  atonement  in  its  relations  to  God _  150 

Sec.  2.  The  atonement  in  its  relations  to  Man _  150 

Sec.  3.  The  atonement  in  its  relations  to  the  future  universe  __  152 

Chap.  IV. — The  Moral  Theory  of  the  Atonement _  159 

Matter  of  Preaching. 

Chap.  V. — The  Redeemed  Church _ _ _  166 

Sec.  1.  The  relations  of  the  church  to  the  angels  of  heaven _ 166 

Sec.  2.  The  relations  of  the  church  to  the  future  universe _ 167 

Sec.  3.  Employments  of  the  redeemed  hereafter - -  lu8 

Sec.  4.  The  Church  a  partaker  of  the  divine  nature -  171 

1.  In  its  internal  character  of  Benevolence _  172 


11 


PAGE. 


2.  In  its  internal  relations  of  Affection _ _ _  172 

3.  In  its  internal  experience  of  Blessedness _  172 

Sec.  5.  The  final  exaltation  of  the  Church _  174 

Chap.  VI. — Plan  of  the  Universe _  178 


APPENDIX  A. 


HEREDITARY  DEPRAVITY. 

1.  History  of  the  Doctrine _ _ _  181* 

2.  Exegesis  of  Rom.  5  :  12-19 _  18o 

3.  Argument  from  reason _ _  187 

4.  The  hypothesis  useless,  unreasonable  and  mischievous _  188 

5.  The  real  consequences  of  Adam’s  sin  to  the  race _ _ _  192 


APPENDIX  B. 

GOD  CANNOT  ACT  INCONSISTENTLY  WITH  HIMSELF. 


1.  Divine  limitations,  or  what  God  cannot  do _  194 

2.  Limitations  of  grace _  196 

3.  Individual  salvation _ _ _ 201 

4.  Foreknowledge,  Foreordination  and  Election _ _  203 

5.  Reprobation _ _ _ _ 207 

APPENDIX  C. 

BIBLE  TESTIMONY. 


1.  The  wicked  excluded  from  heaven _ _ _ _  211 

2.  The  wicked  sent  to  a  place  of  punishment _  212 

3.  The  punishment  of  the  wicked  endless _  213 

4.  Doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament _ _  215 

Quotation  from  Richard  Baxter _ _ 216 


INDEX  TO  FOOT  NOTES. 

Authority  of  the  Bible _ _ _ * _  18 

Change  of  the  Sabbath _ _ _  20 

Exegesis  of  Jam.  1:  14,  15..- _ _  36 

Some  might  prefer  to  consider  self -gratification  the  occasion  of  sin  _  36 

Objections  considered  in  Part  Second _  37 

“  Anticipative  consequences  of  sin  ” _ _ ■_ _  53 

Error  in  the  parental  training  of  children _ _  63 

When  were  the  unfallen  angels  created _ _  68 

The  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  other  worlds _ _ . _  71 


12 


PAGE. 

Christ  made  like  us _ _ _ _ _  81 

Rev.  Albert  Barnes.. - -  94 

Why  should  God  make  efforts  to  save  those  whom  he  foresees  will  be 

lost _ 114 

The  Atonement  a  scheme  of  compensation _  115 

Probation  after  death .  •_ - - - - 121 

*  Argument  from  the  necessities  of  moral  government _  _ 135 

Must  I  believe  the  Gospel — Robert  Elsmere _ _ _  _  _  151 

Chalmers’  view  of  the  Atonement _ _ _ _  157 

Error  of  Dr.  Bushnell _  199 

Extract  from  Conybeare  and  Howson  making  the  Angels  dependent 

on  Redemption _ _ 167 

Dr.  Bellamy’s  view  of  the  future  universe _  168 

Calvin’s  Commentary  on  Eph.  1:  23 _ _ _ _  176 

Augustine’s  view  of  Rom.  5  :  12 _  180 

Dr.  Beecher’s  hypothesis  of  pre-existence _ 184 

Knight’s  paraphrase  of  Rom.  5:  19 _ _ _  186 

Creationism  as  an  hypothesis  superior  to  Traducianism .  _  _  188 

Infant  character _ 189 

“  Sin  a  nature  and  that  nature  guilt.”  Prof.Shedd _  190 

God  renewing  the  will _ 202 

God  permitting  men  to  be  lost _ _  203 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  actual  system  of  the  universe  contains  within  itself  all 
existing  things  in  harmonious  combination,  and  moreover  con¬ 
tains  within  itself  the  reason  or  explanation  why  things  are  as 
they  are. 

Can  a  system  be  constructed  by  us  respecting  which  these 
same  things  shall  be  true?  We  see  somewhat  of  the  actual 
plan,  and  Revelation  teaches  us  much  more.  Can  the  remainder 
be  imagined ,  like  an  attempt  to  construct  a  machine  entire, 
some  of  whose  parts  are  wanting  ? 

Such  an  attempt  is  made  in  the  present  work.  The  effort 
is  to  construct  a  plan  of  the  universe  lying  within  the  limits  of 
possible  truth,  which  shall  contain  within  itself  all  the  facts  both 
of  Reason  and  Revelation  in  harmonious  combination,  and  also 
contain  within  itself  the  reason  or  explanation  of  all  which 
admits  of  explanation. 

To  condense  the  work,  those  doctrines  on  which  the  pecul¬ 
iar  views  of  the  writer  would  throw  no  additional  light,  have 
received  almost  no  attention.  The  four  points  which  are  made 
specially  prominent  are  the  following : 

First — That  all  the  arrangements  of  the  universe — past, 
present  and  future,  have  prime  reference  to  the  work  of  Re¬ 
demption  ;  so  that  all  the  past  has  been  only  in  the  way  of 
preparation  for  its  introduction,  and  so  that  the  coming  ages 
will  only  be  for  its  progressive  and  eternal  unfolding. 

Secondly — To  explain  the  origin  of  sin  so  far  as  it  admits 
of  explanation.  No  good  reason  can  be  given  for  its  existence, 
for  then  it  would  not  be  sin  ;  and  poor  ones  are  worthless. 

Thirdly — To  defend  the  benevolence  of  God  in  the  execution 
of  endless  penalty  on  the  ungodly,  in  the  only  possible  way  in 


14 


which  it  can  be  defended,  namely:  By  showing  how  it  may  be 
inseparable  from  the  existence  of  a  moral  universe,  and,  there¬ 
fore,  that  the  choice  must  lie  between  no  moral  system  at  all,  or 
one  burdened  with  both  sin  and  its  endless  penalty. 

Fourthly — To  show  the  final  glory  of  the  redeemed  Church, 
as  being  the  grand  medium  through  which  the  benefits  and  bless¬ 
ings  of  Redemption  are  to  flow  to  the  universe  forever. 

This  book  starts  with  the  Bible.  It  does  not  start  with 
pre-conceived  opinions,  and  philosophical  speculations  as  to  what 
the  system  of  the  universe  ought  to  be,  and  then  explain  the 
Bible  to  correspond;  but  assumes,  at  the  outset,  that  the  Bible  is 
from  God — a  plain  book  for  the  guidance  of  common  men — and 
that  its  natural,  obvious  meaning  is  the  true  one ;  and  then  seeks 
to  adjust  the  system  to  correspond  with  its  declarations.  The 
fact  is  the  more  humble  and  child-like  a  man  is  in  his  acceptance 
of  the  Bible,  and  in  his  submission  to  its  instructions,  the  more 
plain  and  precious  will  it  become  to  him,  and  the  more  surely  will 
he  be  guided  into  all  truth. 

To  that  large  class  in  our  Churches  who  desire  to  adhere  to 
the  evangelical  standards,  and  who,  in  the  face  of  the  doctrines  of 
Universalism,  Restorations m,  and  a  second  Probation,  which  have 
become  so  generally  popular,  desire  still  to  hold  fast  to  the  “faith 
once  delivered  to  the  Saints” ;  and  who  wish  especially  to  see  a 
possible  way,  upon  the  grounds  of  human  reason,  and  mainly  out¬ 
side  of  the  Bible,  in  which  the  sterner  doctrines  of  the  inspired 
word  may  be  fully  reconciled  with  the  Divine  Benevolence,  this 
book,  it  is  believed,  will  be  especially  acceptable. 

The  writer  would  also  ask  the  members  of  our  Evangelical 
Churches  who  have  come  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  under  the  in¬ 
fluence  of  the  above  mentioned  doctrines,  to  give  this  book  a  care¬ 
ful  and  candid  perusal,  believing  that  the  result  will  be  to  shake 
their  confidence  in  all  such  deviations  from  the  Evangelical  stand¬ 
ards,  and  lead  them  eventually  to  see  the  four  great  pillars  of  the 


15 

Divine  Administration — Law,  Reward,  Penalty  and  the  Atone¬ 
ment,  all  reaching  up  into  the  infinite,  and  while  towering  beyond 
the  reach  of  human  vision,  yet  at  the  same  time  resting  on  “foun¬ 
dations  which  cannot  be  moved.” 

The  main  design  of  this  book  as  a  whole  is  this:  — To  develop 
a  plan  of  the  universe  in  which  it  shall  appear  that  God  has  done 
the  best  that  can  be  done  to  lay  the  foundations  of  an  endless 
and  endlessly  expanding  universe  of  moral  beings,  with  sufficient 
stability  and  security  to  stand  the  strain  of  eternity. 


' 


9 


% 


PART  FIRST. 

THE  UNIVERSE,  PAST  AND  PRESENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  MATERIAL  UNIVERSE. 

Sec.  1.  The  creation  of  matter. 

There  is  no  way  of  accounting  for  its  existence  to  which 
there  are  not,  to  our  finite  minds,  unanswerable  objections.  If  we 
assume  for  it  a  beginning,  then  we  also  assume  a  preceding  eter¬ 
nity  of  inaction  on  the  part  of  the  Almighty,  contradicting  all  we 
see  and  know  of  his  present  ceaseless  activity. 

To  assume  that  the  material  universe  had  no  beginning,  and 
that  matter  is  eternal,  is  both  unscriptural  and  unphilosophical. 

First. — It  is  unscriptural. 

The  Scriptures  plainly  teach  the  creation  of  material  things 
by  the  power  of  God.  It  is  the  first  truth  declared  in  the  Bible 
(Gen.  1:1):  “In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth.”  The  same  truth  is  taught  in  Hebrews  1:  10  :  “And  thou, 
Lord,  in  the  beginning  hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the  earth ;  and 
the  heavens  are  the  works  of  thine  hands.”  Says  John  in  his 
Gospel  (1:3):  “  All  things  were  made  by  him.”  And  Paul  in 
Col.  1 :  16,  17  is  still  more  explicit :  “  By  him  were  all  things 
created  that  are  in  heaven  and  that  are  in  earth  ;  all  things  were 
created  by  him,  and  for  him.  And  he  is  before  all  things,  and  by 
him  all  things  consist.” 

Secondly. — The  assumption  is  unphilosophical. 

Reason  teaches  at  this  point  the  same  as  the  Bible.  For  if 
matter  be  eternal  it  must  be  self-existent,  and  therefore  inde¬ 
pendent.  If  independent,  it  would  admit  of  no  change,  either  in 
kind  or  degree.  But  the  visible  and  material  universe  is  ever 
changing,  proving  thus  its  dependence  upon  higher  forces,  and  is, 
therefore,  not  eternal. 

We  accept  the  statement,  therefore,  that  “in  the  beginning 
God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth,”  not  because  we  can  com¬ 
prehend  it,  but  solely  on  the  authority  of  the  Divine  Record.  An 
eternity  past  or  to  come,  is  altogether  beyond  the  comprehension 
of  our  finite  faculties  ;  and  our  most  becoming  position  is  in  sit¬ 
ting  at  the  feet  of  Revelation,  and  saying  with  the  reverent 
Psalmist,  “  I  will  hear  what  God  the  Lord  will  speak”  ;  and  when 

2 


18 


the  declaration  is  clear  and  unequivocal  that  God  is  “ from  ever¬ 
lasting  to  everlasting,”  and  that  “  he  is  before  all  things,  and  by 
him  all  things  consist,”  accept  it  as  authoritative,  even  though  it 
be  to  us  a  profound  and  inexplicable  mystery.* 

*  With  respect  to  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  this  book  assumes  that 
the  whole  Bible  is  an  authoritative  revelation  from  God.  Some  say  that  the 
word  of  God  is  in  the  Bible,  but  not  that  the  whole  Bible  is  from  God. 
Then  a  part  is  divine  and  of  divine  authority,  and  a  part  is  merely 
human,  and  subject,  therefore,  to  the  imperfection  which  belongs  to  all 
merely  human  productions.  Moreover  as  there  is  no  way  of  exactly  dis¬ 
tinguishing  the  human  from  the  divine,  therefore,  we  can  never  be  cer¬ 
tain  which  we  are  reading,  and  therefore,  the  whole  Bible  becomes  of  no 
authority  whatever.  This  assumes  that  the  Almighty  has  undertaken  to 
give  a  revelation  to  men,  but  has  allowed  it  to  become  so  mingled  with 
human  imperfection  as  to  rob  it  of  all  authority.  Such  a  view  represents 
the  Almighty  as  lacking  in  common-sense.  No  common-sense  business 
man  would  so  give  his  instructions  to  his  subordinates  as  to  rob  them  of 
authority.  Therefore  if  God  undertakes  to  give  a  revelation  to  men, benevol¬ 
ence  and  common-sense  both  demand  that  he  so  give  it  as  to  make  it  author¬ 
itative  ;  and  as  he  is  able  so  to  give  it,  therefore  he  has  so  given  it ;  and 
the  position  that  a  part  of  the  Bible  only  is  inspired,  is  untenable.  The 
Bible,  as  originally  given ,  is  not  marred  by  a  single  imperfection,  and 
comes  to  us  in  the  language  of  our  evangelical  standards,  as  “  a  complete 
and  harmonious  system  of  divine  truth,  and  the  only  perfect  rule  of  re¬ 
ligious  faith  and  practice.” 

Moreover  it  was  given  originally  just  as  God  meant  it  should  be  down 
to  the  smallest  letter  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet.  If  there  are  apparent  dis¬ 
crepancies  in  it,  God  put  them  there,  doubtless,  to  provoke  study  and  to 
try  faith.  If  it  is  altogether  unscientific,  God  meant  it  should  be. 
If  there  are  in  it  some  things  obscure,  and  even  unaccountable;  if  the 
style  is  that  of  the  individual  writers;  if  even  there  are  things  in  it  which 
savor  strongly  of  human  imperfection,  God  made  them  thus,  very  likely 
that  captious  men,  with  no  faith  at  heart,  might  stumble  over  them. 

The  Bible  is  God's  Word,  and  as  such  is  endorsed  by  our  Savior,  with¬ 
out  reserve  or  qualification.  He  declared  that  he  ‘  ‘  came  not  to  destroy 
the  Law  or  the  Prophets,  but  to  fulfill.”  (Matt.  5:  17.)  Now,  that  ex¬ 
pression,  ‘‘the  Law  or  the  Prophets,”  covers  the  entire  Old  Testament  as 
then  in  use  among  the  Jews.  Also  he  said  to  the  disciples  on  the  walk 
to  Erumaus — “  O,  fools  and  slow  of  heart  to  believe  all  that  the  prophets 
have  spoken;”  (Luke  24:  25.)  endorsing  here  also  the  entire  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  scriptures,  and  every  word  in  them  as  originally  given — “  all  that 
the  prophets  have  spoken.”  Again  he  says:  “  Till  heaven  and  earth  pass 
one  jot  or  one  title  shall  in  nowise  pass  from  the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled,” 
(Matt.  5:  18.)  “  One  jot."  The  English  word  jot  was  originally  the  name 
of  the  smallest  letter  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet — Yodh;  and  so  the  declara¬ 
tion  is  that  not  the  smallest  letter  shall  fail  of  fulfillment.  This  sounds 
very  much  like  “  verbal  inspiration.”  Again:  “  The  scriptures  must  be 
fulfilled.”  (Mark  14:  49.)  Again:  “The  scripture  cannot  be  broken.” 
(Jno.  10:35.)  Once  more:  “  All  things  must  be  fulfilled  which  were 
written  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  prophets,  and  in  the  psalms  con¬ 
cerning  me;”  (Luke  24:44.)  endorsing  here  also  the  entire  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  in  the  three-fold  division  then  in  use  among  the  Jews. 

Moreover,  he  set  his  seal  upon  the  teachings  of  his  immediate  apostles 
and  followers,  saying  to  them,  “  It  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  spirit  of 
your  Father  that  speaketh  in  you.”  (Matt.  10:20.)  And  so  the  ivhole 


19 

Bible,  as  originally  given ,  is  the  veritable  Word  of  God,  and  to  be  so  ac¬ 
cepted,  even  every  word  of  it. 

David’s  estimate  of  God’s  Word  bears  little  semblance  to  the  “higher 
criticism”  of  these  modern  times.  He  says:  “  The  words  of  the  Lord  are 
pure  words;  as  silver  tried.”  (Ps.  12:  G.)  And  men  now-a-days  can  take 
no  more  appropriate  position,  as  has  been  said,  than  to  sit  at  the  feet  of 
Revelation,  and  when  the  declarations  of  the  Divine  Word  are  under¬ 
stood,  accept  them  without  question. 

Sec.  2.  Mundane  Hypothesis. 

This  much  respecting  the  material  universe  as  a  whole.  A 
few  things  need  to  be  noticed  respecting  this  world  in  particular. 

THE  FACTS  IN  THE  CASE. 

1.  The  records  of  geology  are  clear  and  unmistakable  that 
this  world  has  been  built  up  through  a  steady  process  and  pro¬ 
gress  for  countless  ages  in  order  to  reach  its  present  conditions. 
Furthermore,  that  this  process  has  gone  on  in  the  mineral,  vege¬ 
table  and  animal  kingdoms  by  clear  and  distinct  stages  of  pro¬ 
gress  ;  yet  all  the  while  steadily  advancing  to  its  present  adapta¬ 
tion  to  the  wants  of  the  human  family. 

Also  that  there  is  clearly  recognizable,  in  these  different 
stages,  an  order  of  progress  very  nearly  uniform  with  the  process 
developed  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis. 

2.  The  record  in  Genesis  opens  with  the  representation  of 
this  world  in  a  condition  of  the  utmost  disorder — the  elements  of 
earth,  air  and  water  being  mingled  in  chaotic  confusion — “  with¬ 
out  form  and  void  ” — empty  and  desolate,  with  darkness  brood¬ 
ing  over  the  whole  disorganized  mass ;  in  short,  an  utter  distor¬ 
tion  and  demoralization  of  what  had  apparently  been  previously 
in  the  line  of  uniform  sequence. 

3  There  is  in  this  same  chapter  a  record  of  a  restoration  of 
this  world  to  order  and  harmony  in  the  general  condition  in 
which  we  now  behold  it.  And  here,  without  any  attempt  at  la¬ 
bored  explanation  or  defence,  let  it  be  assumed  that  this  process  is 
described,  as  it  would  have  appeared  to  a  beholder  contemplating 
it  and  watching  its  development. 

On  the  first  day,  light  is  seen  to  struggle  through  the  mingled 
mass  of  air  and  water ;  on  the  second ,  the  complete  separation  of 
these  two  elements  takes  place  ;  on  the  third ,  the  dry  land  appears 
clothed  with  verdure  ;  on  the  fourth ,  the  sun  and  moon  shine 
clearly  and  divide  the  day  and  night  ;  on  the  fifth,  is  the  creation 
of  animal  life  in  the  air  and  water — the  birds  that  fly,  and  the 
fishes  that  swim ;  on  the  sixth ,  the  land  animals  and  man  are 
created ;  and  the  seventh  was  a  day  of  rest  from  this  immediate 


20 


work,  and  this  seventh  day  God  sanctified  through  all  time,  as  a 
day  of  sacred  rest  for  the  human  family.  * 

4.  Many  of  our  Christian  geologists  assume  that  these  days 
mentioned  are  not  days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  but  indefinite 
periods  of  time,  each  of  immense  extent,  the  days  together  con¬ 
stituting  the  long  ages  during  which  the  work  of  fitting  up  the 
world  to  be  the  home  of  the  human  race  was  steadily  progressing. 
But  the  plain  Bible  reader,  seeing  that  the  instituted  Sabbath 
of  rest  is  manifestly  an  ordinary  day  of  twenty-four  hours,  very 
naturally  concludes  that  the  preceding  six  days  must  have  been 
also  of  the  same  ordinary  length  ;  and  therefore,  that  there  must 
have  been  six  consecutive  days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  during 
which  the  work  described  was  commenced  and  completed. 

POSSIBLE  EXPLANATION. 

1.  That  between  the  first  and  second  verses  of  Genesis,  I, 
there  may  have  been  an  interval  of  millions  of  years  or  ages 
during  which  the  world  was  being  fitted  up  for  its  future  uses — 
time  enough  at  least  for  the  accumulation  of  all  the  immense  ani¬ 
mal,  vegetable  and  mineral  deposits  which  are  found  to  exist. 

• 

*It  has  been  assumed  that  the  design  of  ordaining  a  seventh  day  of 
rest  was  in  order  to  commemorate  the  close  of  this  work  of  creation  ;  and 
hence  that  any  change  of  the  day  must  be  a  violation  of  the  original  design 
of  the  Sabbath. 

But  now  let  it  be  assumed  with  equal  and  even  superior  propriety 
and  probability,  that  this  was  not  the  design  at  all ;  but  that  the  main 
design  of  connecting  the  Sabbath  with  the  work  of  creation  was  only  to 
dignify  and  ennoble  the  Sabbath  by  connecting  it  with  what  was  then  the 
greatest  event  in  the  world’s  history.  Then,  in  this  view,  when,  in  after 
times,  another,  and  far  more  stupendous  event  than  the  world’s  creation 
transpired,  namely,  its  Redemption,  how  entirely  natural  that  a  change 
should  be  made  from  the  seventh  to  the  first  day  of  the  week,  in  order  to 
keep  the  day  still  connected  with  the  greatest  event  in  the  world’s  history 
— the  completion  of  this  work  of  Redemption  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ  from  the  dead.  To  elevate  and  ennoble  the  Sabbath,  and  create 
an  impression  of  its  supreme  sacredness,  is  the  manifest  object  in  the  in¬ 
spired  record  both  in  Genesis  and  the  Ten  Commandments. 

Now  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord’s  Supper  is  manifestly  commemora¬ 
tive,  in  which  we  “show  the  Lord’s  death  until  he  come.”  But  no  such 
design  is  evident  in  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath.  Neither  under  the  Mo¬ 
saic  or  the  Christian  dispensation  does  it  have  any  such  apparent  object. 
The  grand  design  of  it  is  thus  expressed,  “Remember  the  Sabbath  day 
to  keep  it  holy,''  and  the  reason  why  it  was  connected  with  the  world’s 
creation  was  doubtless  to  make  it  a  primeval  institution,  thus  lifting  it 
above  all  mere  temporary  institutions  and  observances,  and  making  the 
obligation  of  it’s  observance  binding  upon  the  human  family  to  the  end 
of  time,  and  the  change  to  the  first  day  of  the  week,  was  only  made  to 
enhance  the  sacredness  of  the  Sabbath  still  as  a  Divine  institution  ;  making 
it  thus  to  correspond  in  sacredness  and  elevation  with  the  great  crowning 
work  of  the  world’s  redemption — the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from 
the  dead.  In  this  view  the  change  from  the  seventh  to  the  first  day  of  the 
week  becomes  peculiarly  appropriate  and  impressive. 


21 


2.  That  the  fallen  angels  may  have  had  their  creation,  exis¬ 
tence  and  probation  on  this  planet.  The  proof  is  that  they  have 
been  here  for  thousands  of  years,  according  to  the  scripture 
record,  and  there  is  no  record  of  their  having  been  elsewhere. 

Also  Satan  is  called  “  the  god  of  this  world,”  (2.  Cor.  4:  4.) 

Also  in  the  recorded  interview  between  Satan  and  Christ, 
(Luke  4 :  5-7 :)  Satan  claims  the  ownership  of  this  world ;  and 
the  claim  was  not  disputed.  There  is  this  much  of  evidence  that 
this  world  has  been' their  only  residence,  and  with  nothing  against 
it. 

That  they  had  a  probation — a  trial  of  allegiance,  is  very 
clearly  intimated  in  Jude  6.  “  The  Angels  which  kept  not  their 

first  estate,  but  left  their  own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in 
everlasting  chains  etc.”  In  this  view  this  world  was  also  the  scene 
of  their  rebellion. 

3.  The  next  assumption  in  this  possible  explanation  is,  that 
the  judgment  that  followed  their  sin,  was  not  only  executed  upon 
them,  but  upon  the  world  itself.  God  would  make  an  impressive 
exhibition  of  his  hatred  of  their  rebellion,  perhaps  to  the  unfallen 
angels,  to  keep  them  from  rebellion  ;  and  so,  even  the  world  it¬ 
self,  with  all  its  probable  beauty  and  harmony,  and  attractiveness, 
became,  under  this  Divine  judgment,  a  scene  of  desolation, — of 
utter  ruin  and  disorganization,  such  as  the  opening  of  Genesis 
describes  it — “  without  form  and  void  ” — a  mass  of  chaotic  dis¬ 
order  and  confusion. 

Now  such  a  transaction  is  not  at  all  improbable  in  view  of 
what,  according  to  the  sacred  record,  is  to  be  the  final  catastrophe 
of  this  wicked  world — “  The  earth  and  the  works  that  are  therein 
shall  be  burned  up”  (2  Pet.  3 :  10.)  This  event  is  doubtless 
meant  to  be  the  manifested  displeasure  of  the  Almighty  at  human 
sinfulness,  even  as  we  are  assuming  this  first  visitation  to  have 
been  the  manifestation  of  his  displeasure  at  angelic  sinfulness — 
the  fearful  and  terrible  protest  to  the  universe  of  his  utter  loath¬ 
ing  of  this  wicked  world,  and  of  the  works  which  have  been  done 
in  it.  For  this  he  will  kindle  upon  it  the  fires  of  the  final  conflag¬ 
ration  in  which  “the  heavens  being  on  fire  shall  be  dissolved,  and 
the  elements  shall  melt  with  fervent  heat.”  (2  Pet.  3  :  12.) 

4.  The  next  assumption  is  that  the  account  given  in  Genesis  is 
that  of  the  re-constructio7i  of  this  world  in  six  natural  days,  dur¬ 
ing  which  the  Almighty,  in  the  exercise  of  his  miraculous  power, 
restored  again  the  ruined  world  in  the  order  described,  and  fitted 
it  up  for  the  home  of  the  human  race,  in  view  of  the  two-fold  fact 
that  it  would  be  the  home  of  a  sinfid  race,  and  also  the  theatre 
of  the  great  work  of  redemption  through  Jesus  Christ,  and  whose 
advent  into  it,  on  this  errand  of  mercy,  making  thus  an  exhibition 
of  God’s  infinite  love  for  the  sinful,  would  constitute  the  grand 
drama  of  the  universe. 


CHAPTEE  II. 

BENEVOLENCE  OF  THIS  MORAL  SYSTEM. 

Why  should  God  create  a  being  who  can  sin,  and  especially 
a  system  of  such  ;  why,  in  short,  create  a  system  of  free  moral 
agents'?  Answer: — A  moral  being,  one  made  “in  the  image  of 
God,”  with  an  intellect  to  know  and  understand  him,  sensibili¬ 
ties  to  feel  his  love,  and  a  will  to  choose  his  service,  ii  the  best 
kind  of  being  possible ;  because, 

First — The  voluntary  love  and  service  of  one  who  can  under¬ 
stand  and  appreciate  God,  is  a  source  of  the  highest  satisfaction 
to  Him  j  and  the  love  of  one  such  being,  of  more  value  to  him 
than  all  the  material  works  which  his  hands  have  builded. 

Secondly — Such  a  being,  acting  rightly,  contains  within  him¬ 
self  elements  of  happiness  the  best  in  kind,  and  the  greatest  in 
degree ;  a  free  moral  agent  alone  being  susceptible  to  the  bless¬ 
edness  of  conscious  virtue,  and  of  being  drawn  into  loving  sym¬ 
pathy  with  God ;  and 

Thirdly — There  can  be  no  more  exalted  a  being  than  one 
made  in  God's  image,  for  there  can  be  no  better  pattern  ;  and 
therefore,  also,  a  system  of  such  free  moral  agents,  loving  and 
serving  God,  as  they  might  do  and  ought  to  do,  is  the  best  possi¬ 
ble  or  conceivable. 

But  it  is  objected  that  such  beings  can  and  will  and  do  sin. 
Answer  :  If,  in  a  moral  system,  all  would  sin  and  be  lost,  then 
benevolence  would  not  admit  of  its  creation.  Even  if  a  majority 
would  sin  hopelessly,  we  cannot  see  how  its  creation  would  be 
benevolent.  But  if  the  vast  majority  will  remain  true  to  God  and 
duty,  then,  as  holiness  and  consequent  happiness  are  as  valuable 
in  the  way  of  good,  as  sin  and  consequent  misery  are  bad  in  the 
way  of  evil,  and  the  one  as  important  to  be  secured  as  the  other 
to  be  prevented,  the  creation  of  such  a  moral  system  becomes 
manifestly  the  dictate  of  benevolence.  That  such  is  the  charac¬ 
ter  of  the  present  moral  system,  will  abundantly  appear  in  the 
progress  of  the  work  ;  and  the  benevolence  of  God  in  its  creation, 
be  defended  on  the  two  -fold  ground :  First — that  the  number  of 
those  who  sin  hopelessly,  are  the  smallest  fraction  of  the  whole  ; 
and  secondly — that  God  does,  for  the  salvation  of  every  individ¬ 
ual,  all  that  Omnipotence  can  do. 

Also,  if  benevolence  demand  the  existence  of  a  moral  system, 
then  moral  beings  must  be  created,  whatever  use  they  make  of 
their  free-agency ;  and  if  God  makes  them  perfect  in  their  original 
constitution,  places  them  in  the  best  possible  surroundings,  and 


23 


uses  all  proper  influences  with  them  to  lead  them  to  a  holy  life, 
then  if,  in  these  circumstances,  they  sin ,  tbe  responsibility  of 
their  transgression  rests  not  with  him  ;  they  alone  are  responsible 
for  it  and  assume  the  entire  burden  of  its  condemnation. 

To  illustrate — Suppose  a  man  contemplates  the  founding  of 
a  Christian  college.  Now  endow  him  with  foreknowledge  to  see 
that,  in  that  event,  a  few  who  enter  it  will  abuse  their  privileges, 
waste  time,  talents  and  opportunities,  and  become  dissipated  and 
ruined  ;  while  the  mass  will  graduate  with  honor,  and  become  a 
blessing  to  themselves,  their  friends,  and  the  community  at  large. 
Shall  he  abandon  the  project?  Common-sense  says,  No.  Com¬ 
mon-sense  ever  decides  to  do  that  which  is  on  the  whole  for  the 
best ,  in  any  and  all  conceivable  circumstances. 

Moreover,  in  the  case  supposed,  these  dissipated  students 
shoulder  the  entire  responsibility  of  their  wrong  doing.  The 
institution  is  not  in  fault,  and  the  teachers  are  not  in  fault,  and 
the  founder  is  not  in  fault.  The  fault  is  all  their  own,  and  they 
must  suffer  the  consequences.  The  best  has  been  done  for  them 
that  can  be  done.  Thus  we  are  to  contemplate  this  great  moral 
system  of  the  universe  into  which  sin  has  entered,  and  into  which 
its  entrance  was  distinctly  foreseen,  with  all  the  woes  and  miser¬ 
ies  it  has  entailed,  and  which  will  encumber  it  forever.  But  not¬ 
withstanding  this  dreadful  draw-back,  our  effort  will  be  to  show 
that  for  this  sin  and  suffering  God  is  in  no  way  responsible,  seeing 
he  has  done  all  that  could  be  done  to  prevent  it,  in  accordance 
with  his  own  declaration  in  Is.  5:4.  “What  could  have  been  done 
more  to  my  vineyard  that  I  have  not  done  in  it and,  therefore, 
that  those  who  sin  assume  entire  responsibility  for  their  wrong 
doing,  and  for  its  fearful  consequences.  But  that  notwithstand¬ 
ing  this  dreadful  draw-back,  it  is  still,  not  merely  a  benevolent 
system,  but  a  grand  and  glorious  one  ;  infinitely  better  than  none 
at  all ,  and  every  way  worthy  of  its  Diviue  Author. 

Still  the  question  comes  up — Why  should  there  be  any  per¬ 
version  of  moral  agency?  And  this  point  remains  to  be  con¬ 
sidered. 


CHAPTER  III. 


THE  FALLEN  ANGELS. 

The  Scripture  record  of  the  Fallen  Angels  is  brief  but  de¬ 
cisive.  The  Devil  first  appears  in  the  garden  of  Eden  as  a  tempter 
in  the  form  of  a  serpent,  and  hence  is  called  in  Rev.  12  :  9.  “That 
old  serpent  the  Devil.”  He  is  also  called  in  Eph.  2:2,  “  the 
prince  of  the  power  of  the  air,”  which  Stuart  translates,  “  the 
prince  of  the  aerial  host”  In  respect  to  their  number,  those 
possessing  one  man  were  called  Legion  “  because  they  were 
many”  From  2  Pet.  2  :  4  and  Jude  6,  we  learn  that  they  sinned 
against  God,  and  were  cast  down  to  hell  for  their  rebellion ;  and 
from  Matt.  25  :  41,  that  the  place  for  the  final  punishment  of 
ungodly  men,  was  prepared  originally  for  them.  These  are  the 
main  facts  recorded. 

Sec  1.  When  were  they  created? 

As  they  are  the  first  moral  being  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures, 
we  should  naturally  conclude  them  to  have  been  the  first  created. 
But  to  assume  this  is  also  to  assume  the  present  infancy  of  the 
moral  system  ;  and  this  has  not  been  generally  accepted.  The 
attempt  will  now  be  to  demonstrate  its  entire  reasonableness. 

INFANCY  OF  THE  MORAL  SYSTEM. 

The  question  is — Has  the  peopling  of  the  worlds  been  going 
on  for  ages,  so  that  our  world  is  only  an  insignificant  one  among 
the  infinitude  of  peopled  worlds  ;  or  are  the  angels  fallen  and 
unfallen,  and  the  human  race,  the  only  moral  beings  as  yet 
created — the  pioneers  of  an  endless  moral  universe  that  is  yet  to 
be,  and  upon  whose  future  unfoldings  they  are  to  exert  a  direct, 
powerful  and  eternal  influence  ?  We  assume  the  present  infancy 
of  the  moral  system  for  the  following  reasons  : 

1.  There  is  no  evidence  from  the  Bible  that  other  worlds  are 
peopled. 

The  Bible  mentions  no  other  moral  beings  than  the  angels — 
fallen  and  unfallen — and  the  human  race  ;  so  that  to  assume  the 
existence  of  others  is  to  go  just  so  far  beyond  the  divine  record. 
Two  passages  only  may  seem  to  require  consideration. 

Job  38:4,7:  “Where  wast  thou  when  I  laid  the  foun¬ 
dations  of  the  earth,  .  .  .  when  the  morning  stars  sang  together, 
and  all  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy  ?”  Who  were  these  “sons 
of  God  ?”  W e  may  suppose  them  to  have  been  the  fallen  angels 


25 


in  the  days  of  their  innocence,  when  they  may  have  been  the  only 
created  beings,  and,  like  Adam  in  the  garden  previous  to  his  fall, 
were  studying  the  character  of  God  through  his  works,  and 
coming,  in  this  way,  to  a  knowledge  of  God  and  duty,  and  reaching 
the  point  of  intelligent  responsibility.  As  the  first  of  created 
beings,  they  would  need  the  evidence  that  God  was  their  great 
Creator ;  and  very  likely  God  permitted  them  to  witness  the 
creation  of  our  earth,  rising  from  chaos  at  his  will,  its  foundations 
laid,  its  pillars  set  up,  and  its  hills  and  vales  robed  in  verdure, 
and  fitted  up,  perchance,  for  their  own  residence  ;  for,  as  we  have 
seen,  there  are  a  few  expressions  in  the  Bible  which  seem  to  in¬ 
dicate  that  this  world  has  been  their  only  habitation,  and  that 
they  had  their  probation  on  this  planet. 

Suppose  this  passage  to  allude  to  them,  how  appropriate  the 
appellation  to  them  of  “  the  morning  stars” — the  first  of  created 
beings,  rejoicing  in  the  spring-time  of  their  conscious  being,  ad¬ 
miring  the  works  of  God,  and  pouring  fourth  to  him  their  songs 
of  praise  ! 

Another  passage  is  Genesis  3  :  24  :  “  He  placed  at  the  east 

of  the  garden  of  Eden  cherubims .” 

An  elaborate  article  on  the  cherubim  of  the  sacred  Scriptures, 
by  Rev.  Albert  Barnes,  will  be  found  in  Yol.  VIII,  of  the  Quar¬ 
terly  Christian  Spectator ,  in  which  the  writer  comes  to  the  fob 
lowing  conclusion : 

“  They  were  not  angels.  They  are  never  spoken  of  as  such. 
Nor  are  they  represented  either  as  angels,  or  as  designed  to  in¬ 
dicate  real  forms  of  life.  The  idea  of  an  angel,  therefore,  at  the 
entrance  of  the  garden  of  Eden,  is  the  idea  of  a  philosophy,  or  the 
notion  of  the  nursery,  and  withont  any  foundation  in  the  Scrip¬ 
tures.”  ( Christian  Spectator,  Yol.  VIII.  p.  386.) 

2.  There  is  no  evidence  from  reason  that  other  worlds  are 
peopled. 

As  to  the  fixed  stars ,  as  Chalmers  says,  “  these  orbs  have 
sent  us  scarce  another  message  than  told  by  their  feeble  glim¬ 
mering  upon  the  eye — the  simple  fact  of  their  existence.”  And 
since  his  day  the  solar  spectrum  has  revealed  to  us  physical 
elements  in  their  constitution  identical  with  those  of  our  planet. 
But  this  is  all. 

As  to  the  planets ,  the  fact  of  their  annual  and  diurnal  revo¬ 
lution,  like  our  earth,  their  retinue  of  revolving  satellites,  their  en¬ 
velopment  in  an  atmosphere,  and  any  other  facts  which  liken  them 
to  our  earth,  and  which  might,  therefore,  be  supposed  to  indicate 
abodes  of  intelligence,  are  all  equally  well  accounted  for  on  the 
assumption  that  they  are  yet  to  be  peopled. 

The  author  of  the  “  Plurality  of  Worlds,”  has  also  shown  con¬ 
clusively  that  not  a  single  fact  of  astronomical  science  looks  at 
all  in  the  direction  of  a  peopled  universe ;  and  even  beyond  this, 


26 

that  all  the  facts  of  astronomy  point  to  this  as  the  only  peopled 
world. 

3.  There  are  serious  objections  to  the  assumption  of  a 
peopled  universe. 

If  peopled,  then  these  races  of  moral  beings  are  either  in 
obedience  to  God  or  in  rebellion  against  him.  If  in  rebellion, 
then  where  is  the  benevolence  of  creating  a  moral  system  whose 
universal  rebellion  must  have  been  distinctly  foreseen  ? 

If  in  allegiance,  then  why  is  our  world  in  rebellion'?  Could 
a  vast  universe  be  kept  in  subjection,  and  yet  must  a  single  insig¬ 
nificant  world  like  ours  defy  the  Almighty  ?  In  that  case  the  re¬ 
sources  of  the  Creator  have  availed  for  securing  the  obedience  of 
innumerable  worlds  of  beings  ;  why  should  they  fail  here  ?  Or, 
reversing  the  argument,  if  rebellion  has  broken  out  here ,  why  not 
there%  x4.nd  human  reason  furnishes  no  answer. 

Also,  if  the  universe  of  worlds  be  peopled,  then  have  we  ap¬ 
parently  drifted  in  upon  the  great  current  of  being  at  some  indefi¬ 
nite  period,  and  should  occupy,  in  the  universe,  no  position  of 
peculiar  significance.  And  how  then  can  the  mighty  plan  of  re¬ 
demption  in  this  world  be  accounted  for,  and  the  incontrovertible 
evidence  from  this  fact  that  we  occupy  one  of  the  most  prominent 
and  important  positions  in  the  whole  universe  of  God? 

Furthermore,  if  our  position  in  the  universe  be  one  of  intrin¬ 
sic  insignificance,  as  to  all  appearance  it  must  be  if  we  are  but  a 
single  world  among  the  infinitude  of  peopled  worlds,  how  comes 
there  such  a  mighty  contest  for  it  among  invisible  powers  ?  Why, 
for  example,  does  the  interest  and  sympathy  of  all  heaven  center 
on  it,  so  that  the  conversion  of  a  single  sinner  is  welcomed  with 
acclamations  of  joy?  And  why  are  malignant  beings — the  devil 
and  his  angels — all  leagued  together  for  its  destruction  ?  And  to 
these  objections  there  is  no  conceivable  answer. 

4.  There  are  no  valid  objections  to  the  assumption  that  the 
present  is  the  dawning-time  of  the  moral  creation. 

For  there  must  have  been  a  beginning  ;  and  whatever  point 
in  duration  be  assumed  for  it,  however  remote,  will  still  have  an 
eternity  preceding ;  so  that  nothing  is  gained  by  assuming  for  it 
an  earlier  period  than  the  present. 

Also  no  other  supposition  can  be  less  objectionable.  For 
whatever  point  in  past  ages  be  assumed  for  the  commencement 
of  the  moral  universe,  will  still  have  all  the  objections  lying  against 
it  which  may  appear  to  lie  against  the  supposition  of  its  present 
infancy. 

Neither  is  the  existence  of  a  vast  number  of  uninhabited 
worlds,  which  the  assumption  involves,  any  objection  to  it ; 
because  in  a  progressive  system  like  ours  we  should  naturally 
expect  the  prior  creation  of  the  material  universe,  at  least  in  part 
— matter  before  mind.  In  human  affairs,  common-sense  builds  a 


27 


house  before  introducing  the  inmates.  Why  should  not  God 
build  the  material  universe,  in  part,  at  least,  before  peopling  it  ? 

Neither  can  it  be  objected  that  this  hypothesis  gives  our  in¬ 
significant  world  too  great  importance  and  prominence  as  com¬ 
pared  with  the  universe  of  worlds  ;  for  no  greater  prominence  is 
thus  given  to  it  physically  than  God  has  given  it  morally  by 
making  it  the  theater  of  redemption. 

Is  it  objected  that  such  an  assumption  involves  an  eternity 
of  inaction  on  the  part  of  the  Almighty  ?  So  does  any  other  that 
assumes  a  beginning  for  the  material  universe.  For  wherever 
that  beginning  is  located  there  must  be  an  eternity  preceding  it, 
and  the  difficulty  still  remains. 

Shall  the  sttempt  be  made  to  escape  this  by  assuming  the 
eternity  of  the  material  system?  Undoubtedly  our  finite  minds 
can  as  readily  comprehend  the  eternity  of  matter  as  of  mind  ;  but 
to  assume  the  eternity  of  matter  is,  as  has  been  shown,  both  un- 
scriptural  and  unphilosophical. 

5.  All  the  facts  and  intimations  of  the  Bible  point  decidedly 
to  the  present  as  the  commencement  of  the  moral  system. 

First — The  Bible  gives  no  intimation  that  other  worlds  are 
peopled.  It  mentions  the  creation  of  the  “  worlds  ”  by  Jesus 
Christ,  but  makes  no  mention  of  their  inhabitants. 

Secondly — We  find  the  attention  of  all  the  angels  of  heaven 
centered  on  this  world.  Says  the  apostle  :  “  Are  they  not  all 
ministering  spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who  shall  be 
heirs  of  salvation?”  (Heb.  1:  14.)  All  the  angels  of  heaven, 
then,  are  employed  in  earthly  ministrations.  They  may  be  em¬ 
ployed  thus  in  other  worlds,  but  there  is  not  the  slightest  inti¬ 
mation  of  it;  while  here  we  know  they  are  all  interested — so  much 
so  that  “  there  is  joy  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repenteth.” 

Thirdly — The  energies  of  hell  are  also  expended  upon  this 
world.  Satan  is  here,  the  “  prince  of  the  aerial  host,”  tempt¬ 
ing  men,  “  working  in  the  children  of  disobedience.”  and  driving 
with  fiendish  hate  his  schemes  of  mischief.  Here  also  are  a  great 
multitude,  if  not  all,  who  lost  with  him  “their  first  estate.”  They 
may  be  prosecuting  a  similar  work  of  temptation  elsewhere,  but 
we  have  no  intimation  of  it ;  and  for  aught  that  appears  to  the 
contrary,  they  are  all  here  in  this  world.  This  record  of  the 
angels,  therefore,  so  far  as  it  goes,  looks  strongly  in  the  direction 
of  this  as  the  only  peopled  world. 

Fourthly — The  atonement  by  Jesus  Christ,  made  for  man¬ 
kind,  is  the  only  sacrifice  for  sin — the  first  and  final  illustration 
to  the  universe  of  God’s  mercy  to  the  sinful ;  and  all  its  relations 
to  that  universe  appear  to  be  fundamental.  For,  says  the  apostle, 
“  he  died  unto  sin  oncef  and  “  being  raised  from  the  dead,  dieth 
no  more  ;  ”  and  “  when  he  had  by  himself  purged  our  sins,  sat 
down  on  the  right-hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high ;  ”  or,  as  the 


28 


apostle  expresses  it  in  another  place,  “After  he  had  offered  one 
sacrifice  for  sin,  forever  sat  down  on  the  right-hand  of  God,”  as 
if  he  had  now  laid  the  foundation  for  the  great  work  of  eternity, 
and  that  all  the  after  ages  were  to  be  only  for  its  eternal  unfold¬ 
ing. 

Furthermore,  we  learn  that  all  through  the  coming  ages  the 
moral  splendors  of  God’s  character  are  to  find  their  most  vivid 
illustration  in  the  works  and  wonders  of  Redemption — “  That  in 
the  ages  to  come  he  might  show  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace 
in  his  kindness  towards  us  through  Christ  Jesus.”  (Epli  2  :  7.) 

And  again,  the  declaration  is,  that  “  the  whole  family  in 
heaven  and  earth  are  named  for  Christ (Eph.  3  :  15  ) 

Once  more,  the  Atonement  stands  so  related  to  the  universe 
that  “  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in  heaven  and  which 
are  on  earth,  shall  be  gathered  together  in  one,  even  in  him,” 
(Eph.  1:  10.)  and,  “At  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow 
in  heaven  and  in  earth,  and  every  tongue  should  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father.”  (Phil.  2 : 
10,  11.)  We  may  indeed  very  imperfectly  comprehend  the  mean¬ 
ing  of  these  wonderful  declarations,  yet  the  most  natural  assump¬ 
tion  is  that,  in  some  way,  the  Great  Savior  is  the  “  Chief  Corner 
Stone” — the  grand  foundation,  not  merely  of  this  earthly  dispen¬ 
sation,  but  of  the  entire  economy  of  the  universe.  Plainly,  there¬ 
fore,  these  various  relations  of  the  Atonement  indicate  its  position 
in  the  universe  to  be  f  undamental. 

If,  therefore,  any  belief  is  to  be  entertained  respecting  the 
period  when  the  moral  system  was  entered  on,  its  present  infancy 
is  the  most  rational,  and  is  the  only  view  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  foregoing  facts  and  intimations  of  the  Bible. 

It  is,  therefore,  undeniably  true — by  which  is  meant  that 
there  is  much  in  favor  of  the  position,  and  with  no  counteracting 
evidence — that  this  is  our  standpoint  of  observation  ;  that  we  are 
looking  out  upon  the  dawning-time  of  the  moral  creation;  that 
the  work  of  peopling  this  material  universe  has  but  just  com¬ 
menced  ;  that  the  Power  which  has  begun  to  create  free  minds 
will  never  cease  its  activity,  so  that  the  peopling  of  wrorlds  on 
worlds  with  moral  intelligences  will  be  the  ceaseless  work 
of  the  unending  future;  and  therefore  that  God  is  now  laying 
the  foundation-stones  of  that  vast  moral  structure  which,  in  the 
coming  ages  of  eternity,  will  be  magnificent  beyond  conception. 

We  assume,  therefore,  the  Infancy  of  the  Moral  System,  and 
that  the  Fallen  Angels  -were  the  first  moral  beings  created. 

The  usually  received  opinion  that  they  -were  created  at  the 
same  time  with  the  Unfallen  Angels,  and  that  both  existed 
together  for  a  time  in  holiness  and  happiness,  will  be  considered 
when  we  come  to  speak  of  the  latter. 


29 


Sec.  2.  Their  original  constitution. 

All  moral  beings  are  alike  in  the  essential  elements  of  their 
natures.  Intellect,  Sensibilities  and  Will,  or  the  power  of  think¬ 
ing,  feeling  and  choosing,  belong  alike  to  every  such  one,  and  con¬ 
stitute,  in  each  and  all,  “  the  image  of  God”  in  which  Adam  is  de¬ 
clared  to  have  been  created.  At  all  events,  in  the  absence  of  all 
opposing  evidence,  this  is  assumed  to  have  been  the  constitutional 
nature  of  the  Fallen  Angels,  so  that  they,  like  Adam,  were  made 
with  an  Intellect  to  know  God,  Sensibilities  to  feel  his  love,  and 
a  Will  qualifying  them  to  choose  his  service,  If  proof  of  this  were 
needed,  it  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Devil  approached  Eve  as 
if  knowing  how  to  deal  with  a  moral  nature,  whieh  he  could  not 
have  known  unless  conscious  of  one  in  himself  ;  and  the  declara¬ 
tion  of  the  Savior  is  that  wicked  men  and  devils  are  to  be  con¬ 
signed  at  last  to  the  same  place  of  punishment  the  “  Everlasting 
lire  prepared,”  as  he  says,  “  for  the  Devil  and  his  Angels”  $  (Matt. 
25  :  41.)  and  how  could  the  same  place  be  suited  to  the  punish¬ 
ment  of  both,  were  they  not  alike  in  their  natures  ? 

If  this  be  so,  then  the  nature  of  a  moral  being  must  be  as 
unchangeable  in  its  elements  as  the  nature  of  God  himself.  There 
cannot  be  several  kinds  of  moral  beings.  They  must  all  have  a 
fixed,  unchangeable  nature  in  all  its  essential  characteristics. 

And  this  leads  to  another  important  position — The  principles 
of  moral  government  to  which  they  are  subject,  must  be  equally 
unchangeable.  There  cannot  be  several  kinds  of  moral  govern¬ 
ment.  The  same  Law,  or  “decisive  rule  of  action  to  moral  agents” 
— the  same  reward  of  obedience  to  it,  and  the  same  punishment 
for  disobedience,  must  prevail  forever  throughout  the  entire  moral 
universe  of  Jehovah.  “Thou  slialt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with 
all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,”  is  a  command  that 
comes  necessarily  on  any  and  every  moral  being  who  either  has 
been  or  can  be  created,  and  is  the  great  Law  by  which  the  Al¬ 
mighty  is  seeking  to  bind  the  whole  moral  creation  to  himself  and 
duty. 

The  fallen  angels,  therefore,  were  made  with  an  original  con¬ 
stitution,  in  the  very  nature  of  things  the  best  possible,  being  made 
in  the  image  of  God,  than  which  there  can  be  no  better  pattern. 

Therefore,  also,  the  Government  to  which  they  were  made 
subject,  being  precisely  adapted  to  the  nature  and  necessities  of 
such  beings,  must  have  been  the  best  possible  in  its  fundamental 
principles  and  requirements  ;  so  that  obedience  to  it  would  have 
resulted  in  their  highest  holiness  and  happiness. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  the  original  nature  and  surround¬ 
ing  circumstances  of  the  first  moral  beings,  were  the  best  they 
could  possibly  be  for  the  development  of  a  holy  character. 


30 


Sec.  3.  Circumstances  of  their  creation. 

It  is  interesting  to  contemplate  the  position  of  a  company  of 
moral  beings  coming  first  into  existence  and  being  in  the  universe 
alone  with  God  ;  which  we  suppose  to  have  been  the  position  of 
the  fallen  angels. 

1.  It  will  be  proper  to  notice  what  was  the  probable  degree 
of  maturity  appertaining  to  their  original  constitution. 

It  would  be  most  natural  to  suppose  that,  like  Adam,  they 
were  created  in  the  full  possession  of  their  mental  and  moral  fac¬ 
ulties,  and  prepared  at  once  to  contemplate  the  peculiarities  of 
their  situation,  to  survey  the  magnificence  of  the  material  system, 
and  to  be  charmed  with  its  order,  variety  and  beauty,  to  rejoice 
in  the  happiness  which  may  have  been  exhibited  in  the  lower 
orders  of  creation,  to  investigate  the  wonders  of  their  own  mental 
and  moral  constitution,  and  to  draw  from  all  existing  sources 
whatever  would  serve  to  illustrate  the  power,  wisdom  and  benevo¬ 
lence  of  God. 

2.  What  course  would  probably  be  pursued  with  them  in 
these  circumstances  ?  It  seems  probable  that  God  would  reveal 
himself  to  them,  claiming  to  be  their  Creator,  as  well  as  the  Cre¬ 
ator  and  upholder  of  all  the  vast  and  visible  frame  of  things — 
unfold  to  them  his  character  and  attributes  so  far  as  there  had 
been  an  opportunity  for  their  manifestation,  and  accumulate 
before  their  minds  the  evidence  existing  of  the  nature  and  extent 
of  their  obligations  to  love  and  obey  him,  so  as  to  render  them 
inexcusable  for  withholding  obedience. 

Sec.  4.  Why  did  they  si?i  f 

This  question  is  vital  and  fundamental.  Suppose  for  a  start¬ 
ing  point  we  go  back  of  it  somewhat  and  raise  the  more  abstract 
question  :  Why  does  sin  exist  ? 

Some  say  “  God  permits  it,”  but  the  expression  is  misleading  ; 
because  the  word  permit ,  in  ordinary  usage,  implies  favor  towards 
the  thing  permitted ;  and  God  feels  no  favor  towards  sin. 

Others  say,  in  the  way  of  explanation,  that  “  sin  is  overruled 
for  good.”  This  is  never  the  case  except  that  a  sin  may  be  used 
for  the  correction  of  a  greater  sin;  as  where  Peter’s  denial  of 
Christ,  by  showing  him  his  moral  weakness,  corrected  his  over¬ 
weaning  self  confidence,  which  was  spoiling  him  for  an  Apostle. 

But  was  not  the  sin  of  the  Crucifixion  overruled  for  good  ? 
No,  in  no  respect  whatever.  All  the  good  of  the  Crucifixion  come 
from  God  giving  His  Son  to  sufferings  a.nd  death.  But  he  might 
have  done  that  in  a  variety  of  wa}rs.  He  chose  to  let  wickedness 
crucify  him.  Now  what  came  from  God  giving  his  Son  ?  Answer : 
The  offer  of  pardon  and  eternal  life  to  sinful  men,  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  the  common  blessings  of  Probation,  and  the  salvation 
of  the  penitent. 


31 


What  came  from  the  sin  of  the  Crucifixion'?  Answer:  Nothing 
but  the  deep  damnation  of  the  scribes  and  pharisees  concerned  in 
it,  and  the  utter  ruin  of  the  nation.  No  good  of  any  kind  came 
from  the  sin  of  the  crucifixion,  nor  was  it  overruled  for  one  par¬ 
ticle  of  good.  No  result  flowed  from  it  but  in  the  line  of  disaster. 

But  does  not  God  make  “the  wrath  of  men  to  praise  him'?” 
Yes.  But  how  ?  Only  by  his  dealings  with  it  in  the  way  of  judg¬ 
ment.  God  made  the  wrath  of  Pharaoh  to  praise  him  by  the 
judgments  executed  upon  him  ;  and  in  this  way  God’s  “  name 
was  declared  throughout  all  the  earth.”  Now  where  did  the 
good — “ the  praise,”  come  from ?  Answer:  from  God’s  dealings 
with  him.  What  come  from  the  sin  of  Pharaoh1?  Answer  :  Ten 
dreadful  plagues  upon  Egypt,  and  the  final  destruction  of  him 
and  his  hosts  in  the  Red  Sea.  Not  a  particle  of  good  came  from 
the  sin  of  Pharaoh. 

So  God  will  make  the  wrath  of  all  wicked  men  to  praise  him 
at  last  by  the  perdition  with  which  he  will  visit  them  in  the  future 
world;  thus  exhibiting  his  character  as  a  firm  and  efficient  Moral 
Governor.  Now  whence  comes  the  good  ?  Answer  :  From  God’s 
punishment  of  the  sinner.  What  comes  from  the  sin  itself1? 
Nothing  but  damnation.  Not  a  particle  of  good.  Nor  is  the 
wrath  overruled  at  any  one  point  for  good.  It  is  not  overruled 
at  all,  but  goes  right  on  to  work  out  its  own  legitimate  result  of 
disaster  and  ruin. 

Is  it  said  that  if  there  were  no  wrath  there  would  be  no 
punishment,  and,  therefore,  no  exhibition  of  God’s  character  for 
firmness  ?  Certainly  ;  and  what  is  better  no  need  of  such  a  man¬ 
ifestation.  And  God  would  like  nothing  better  than  that  his 
whole  universe  should  love  and  serve  him  supremely.  Notice 
here — 

1.  God's  relations  to  holiness. 

Holiness,  in  its  elements,  is  the  same  in  all  moral  beings.  In 
God  it  is  the  conformity  of  his  character  and  conduct  to  the 
eternal  and  immutable  principles  of  right ;  and  in  his  creatures, 
it  is  the  conformity  of  their  character  and  conduct  to  the  same 
immutable  principles  ;  which  shows  the  propriety  of  the  exhorta¬ 
tion — “Be  ye  holy  for  I  am  holy.”  “  Be  ye  perfect  even  as  your 
Father  in  Heaven  is  perfect.”  “  Partakers  of  his  holiness.” 

Now  then,  if  perfect  holiness  results  in  perfect  blessedness  in 
the  Almighty,  so  it  would  in  all  moral  intelligencies  ;  and  God 
can  desire  nothing  higher  or  better  for  them,  than  to  have  them 
become  like  himself  in  character  and  conduct — to  become  “  holy 
as  he  is  holy.”  Any  loss  of  holiness  therefore,  in  God’s  universe, 
is  a  corresponding  loss  of  happiness,  and  a  loss,  furthermore, 
which  is  irreparable. 


32 


The  idea  therefore,  which  has  been  advocated  by  some  theo¬ 
logians,  that  “  God  prefers  sin  to  holiness  in  every  instance  in 
which  the  former  takes  place” — that  exalted  holiness  which  brings 
ever  peace  to  the  soul,  harmony  with  God,  and  happiness  every¬ 
where,  is  utterly,  inexpressibly  and  inconceivably  absurd. 

2.  God's  relations  to  sin. 

God’s  abhorrence  of  sin  is  measureless. 

Men  persist  in  regarding  sin,  and  especially  their  own  sin,  as 
a  trival  matter,  and  excuse  it,  and  palliate  it,  and  construct  philo¬ 
sophical  systems  representing  it  as  on  the  whole  for  the  best.  But 
apart  from  human  philosophy  and  speculation,  and  that  perverted 
theological  teaching  which  makes  “sin  the  necessary  means  of  the 
greatest  good apart  also,  from  the  schemes  of  infidel  men  to 
accommodate  matters  to  their  own  wicked  conduct,  and  so  to  ar¬ 
range  the  administration  of  the  Almighty,  that  they  can  live  pray¬ 
erless  and  godless  lives  here,  and  yet  come  out  safe  in  the  end — 
apart  from  such  things,  there  is  no  countenance  given  either  from 
reason,  or  revelation,  or  the  workings  of  God’s  providence  in  the 
world,  or  from  any  source  whatever,  to  the  idea,  that  God  has  any 
other  views  or  feelings  about  sin  than  those  of  unmitigated  loath¬ 
ing,  and  an  infinite  preference  that  no  one  of  his-  moral  creatures 
should  ever  have  committed  it.  Apart  from  such  things,  the 
whole  universe  of  God  cries  out  against  the  supposition,  that  the 
God  of  Heaven  can  either  manifest  or  feel  the  least  favor  toward 
sin ;  or  connive  in  any  way  at  its  commission ;  or  have  any  secret 
preference  that  it  should  exist ;  and  unites  in  condemning  sin,  in 
all  circumstances,  as  wholly  unnecessary,  good  for  nothing,  en¬ 
tirely  mischievous,  the  source  of  all  calamity,  the  cause  of  all  pain 
and  suffering,  and  a  fountain  of  absolutely  unmingled  evil. 

“  What,”  you  say,  “is  there,  on  the  whole,  no  good  end  se¬ 
cured  by  the  existence  of  sin?”  Noneat  all.  In  every  relation 
it  sustains  to  God’s  universe,  its  existence  is  calamitous.  It  is 
evil  and  only  evil.  It  is  unmitigated  mischief ;  and  God  has 
arrayed  himself  against  it  from  the  very  first,  with  the  whole 
energy  of  his  infinite  nature ;  used  every  possible  influence 
against  it ;  determined  car  the  system  in  which  he  foresaw 
it  would  exist,  only  because,  from  that  system,  as  a  moral 
system,  he  could  get,  in  spite  of  sin,  the  most  holiness  and  happi¬ 
ness  ;  he  hates  it  everywhere ;  loathes  it  every  where  ;  desires 
nothing  so  much  as  that  every  being  who  is  committing  it  would 
stop,  and  never  be  guilty  of  another  sin ;  regrets  exceedingly  that 
any  such  one  should  ever  have  committed  it ;  never  has  done  the 
least  thing  to  induce  him  to  commit  it ;  made  him  “  upright” 
at  the  outset,  that  is,  made  him  to  act  rightly  ;  made  it  the  “  chief 
end”  of  his  existence  “to  glorify  God  and  enjoy  him  forever,”  not 


33 


to  sin  against  him  ;  has  aimed  the  entire  round  of  his  providential 
dealings  with  him  since  his  creation,  against  his  sinning ;  has 
given  him  every  conceivable  warning,  brought  to  bear  on  him  the 
most  terrible  threatenings ;  made  him  to  feel  the  mischief  of  sin 
in  his  own  bitter  experience, and  in  ail  his  dealings  with  him,  any¬ 
where,  and  everywhere  has  been  working  steadily  against  sin. 

And  with  this  view  the  Bible  in  its  whole  spirit  and  letter 
accords.  It  arrays  itself  utterly  against  all  such  wicked  notions 
as  that  God  desires  the  existence  of  sin  in  his  universe  for  any 
reason.  It  represents  him  as  arrayed  in  unqualified  hostility  both 
against  sin  and  sinners.  There  is  no  uncertain  sound  in  the  lan¬ 
guage  of  the  Bible.  It  does  not  represent  God  as  hating  sin  in 
the  abstract,  and  yet  feeling  favor  toward  the  sinner  ;  nor  as  op¬ 
posed  to  the  sinner,  while,  at  the  same  time,  for  some  reason, 
preferring,  on  the  whole,  his  sin;  but  it  represents  him  as  stand¬ 
ing  up,  with  no  qualification  or  softening  whatever,  as  the  utter 
antagonist  of  all  sin  and  of  every  sinner — “  Thou  art  not  a  God 
which  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness,  neither  shall  evil  dwell  with 
thee.  The  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  thy  sight  ;  thou  hatest  all 
workers  of  iniquity.”  (Ps.  5:  5.) 

The  true  relation  of  the  Almighty  to  holiness  and  sin  may  be 
briefly  stated  as  follows  : 

1.  God  loves  holiness  with  an  infinite  affection,  and  carries 
out  that  affection  with  an  infinite  energy,  securing  all  the  holiness 
possible  in  a  universe  of  moral  beings. 

2.  God  hates  sin  with  an  infinite  hatred,  and  carries  out 
that  hatred  with  an  infinite  energy,  preventing  all  the  sin  pos¬ 
sible  in  a  universe  of  moral  beings. 

3.  Everything  in  the  way  of  holy  living  and  acting,  is  just 
so  much  of  gain  to  the  whole  universe  of  God  ;  and  everything  in 
the  way  of  sin,  is  just  so  much  of  irreparable  loss  to  the  whole 
universe  of  God. 

The  least  deviation  from  these  statements,  confuses  our  nec¬ 
essary  ideas  of  moral  relations,  and  renders  the  holiness  and 
benevolence  of  the  Creator,  logically  indefensible. 

We  return  now  to  the  question —  Why  did  the  Fallen  Angels 

sin. 

The  view  is  not  imfrequently  entertained  that  a  pure  and  per¬ 
fect  being  would  obey  God  as  a  matter  of  course ;  and  that  sub¬ 
mission  to  his  will  on  the  part  of  such  a  one  would  require  no  self- 
denial.  Our  leading  theologians  are  accustomed  to  speak  of 
Adam  in  the  garden  as  one  whose  only  inclination  was  to  obe¬ 
dience.  Dr.  Bushnell  speaks  of  him  as  “  spontaneous  to  good.” 

But  were  this  true,  the  first  sin  would  have  been  impossible. 
If  submission  to  God  were  an  entirely  easy  matter,  then  submis¬ 
sion  would  have  been  always  rendered  ;  and  the  first  sin  becomes, 
f  not  exactly  impossible — for  that  expression  would  seem  to  con- 

3 


34 

flict  with  free  agency — yet  as  certain  not  to  be  committed  as  if  it 
were. 

In  accounting  for  the  existence  of  sin,  it  is  customary  to  trace 
the  sinfulness  of  the  human  race  to  an  organic  connection  with 
sinful  Adam ;  and  then  to  trace  his  sin  to  the  temptation  of  the 
Devil.  But  how  is  the  sin  of  the  Devil  to  be  accounted  for  ? 
Where  did  his  sin  originate? 

We  face  here  the  prime  difficulty  in  theology. 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  SIN. 

This  has  been  called  “  the  great  riddle  of  the  Universe  ;  ”  or 
as  Dr.  Bushnell  graphically  terms  it,  “  The  night  side  of  the  cre¬ 
ation.” 

Assuming  the  Fallen  Angels  to  have  been  the  first  beings 
created,  and  the  first  sinful  beings,  our  effort  will  be  to  account, 
so  far  as  may  be,  for  this  first  sin.  Why  was  this  committed  ? 
Manifestly  no  good  reason  can  be  given  for  this,  or  any  other  sin; 
for  then,  as  has  been  said,  it  would  not  be  sin,  and  poor  ones  are 
worthless.  At  the  same  time,  no  moral  being  acts  in  any  way, 
either  right  or  wrong,  without  some  sort  of  a  reason.  What  was 
the  reason  or  occasion  for  the  commission  of  the  first  sin. 

Here  notice,  it  must  have  been  committed  under  the  three 
following  conditions : 

1.  Those  who  committed  it  came  directly  from  the  hand  of 
God,  and  were  therefore  pure  and  perfect  in  their  original  consti¬ 
tution. 

2.  They  must  have  been  placed  in  the  best  possible  circum¬ 
stances — the  best  surroundings  for  the  development  of  a  holy 
character.  We  argue  both  these  points  from  the  assumed  benev¬ 
olence  of  God. 

3.  They  encountered  no  temptation  from  malignant  beings; 
for  there  were  no  unholy  beings  to  present  it.  Hence  their  posi¬ 
tion  was  in  all  respects  the  best  calculated  to  result  in  holiness. 

The  vital  point  is  thus  demonstrated  that  an  occasion  of  sin 
must  exist  in  a  pure  and  perfect  being,  placed  in  the  best  possible 
circumstances.  What  could  it  have  been  ? 

This  leads  us  to  consider  the  occasion  of  sin. 

The  word  occasion  is  here  used  with  carefulness  and  precis¬ 
ion,  as  being  entirely  distinct  from  the  efficient  cause.  For  ex¬ 
ample  :  the  occasion  of  gluttony  is  the  natural  appetite  for  food  ; 
but  because  that  between  this  occasion  and  the  gluttony  there 
comes  in  the  free,  moral,  and  responsible  being,  under  obligation 
to  keep  all  his  inclinations  in  due  subordination  to  the  higher  dic¬ 
tates  of  reason  and  conscience,  therefore  does  he  himself  become 
the  efficient  cause  of  the  sinful  gluttony.  For  the  occasion  he  is 
in  no  way  responsible,  while  he  shoulders  the  entire  burden  o 


35 


responsibility  for  the  sinful  gluttony.  So  the  efficient  cause  of  sin 
in  any  form  can  only  be  the  moral  being  himself  who  commits  it ; 
and  the  question  now  to  be  considered  is,  How  comes  it  that  a 
being  made  in  the  image  of  God,  and  pure  and  perfect  in  his  orig¬ 
inal  constitution,  becomes  the  efficient  cause  of  sin  % 

1.  Every  being  made  in  God’s  image  must  be  free — truly 
free — or  else  he  would  not  be  made  in  His  image. 

2.  He  must  be  conscious  that  he  is  free.  He  cannot  be  free 
without  being  conscious  of  it. 

3.  He  must  love  to  exercise  this  freedom  in  the  way  of  inde¬ 
pendent  action ;  which  means  mainly  that  he  must  love  to  seek 
and  obtain  whatever  pleases  him — to  seek  his  own  personal  grati¬ 
fication  without  restraint.  He  cannot  have  this  freedom  without 
loving  to  exercise  it — in  common  language,  without  loving  to 
have  his  own  way.  Nothing  indeed  is  plainer  than  that  he  can¬ 
not  but  love  the  objects  which  minister  to  his  gratification.  He 
must  delight  to  seek  his  enjoyment  in  every  avenue  opened — to 
roam  the  universe  at  will,  taxing  every  object,  every  scene,  every 
employment  affording  satisfaction.  Therefore, 

4.  To  give  up  this  independence  of  action  and  submit  to 
restraint,  which  oftentimes  involves  the  giving  up  of  objects  in 
themselves  desirable,  cannot  be  an  easy  matter.  It  must  cost  a 
struggle.  It  is  going  against  inclination — practicing  self-denial. 
And  this  must  be  attended  with  reluctance,  and  a  reluctance  just 
proportioned  to  the  love  of  independence.  By  just  so  much  as 
he  loves  his  own  way,  by  just  that  much  he  must  make  an  effort 
in  order  to  surrender  it.  But, 

5  It  is  his  highest  duty  to  surrender  it,  and  consent  to  be 
guided,  governed,  and  restrained ,  if  need  be,  as  God  may  see  fit, 
as  the  only  security  for  the  harmony  and  welfare  of  the  universe, 
which  requires  the  merging  of  all  wills  in  the  one  controlling  will 
of  the  Almighty.  Without  this  submission  to  God,  each  one, 
acting  out  his  natural  inclinations,  would  set  up  for  himself,  and 
there  would  be  as  many  independent  wills  as  there  are  individuals, 
each  acting  for  himself,  and  with  no  paramount  regard  for  the 
general  good;  and  the  resulting  collision,  strife,  discord,  and 
suffering  would  be  uncontrollable  and  dreadful,  and  the  universe 
itself  become  a  moral  wreck  ;  so  that  the  only  security  for  the 
harmony  and  happiness  of  the  universe  is  the  submission  of  all 
individual  wills  to  the  one  controlling  will  of  God.  Therefore, 

6.  We  see  the  absolute  necessity  that  God  assert  his  control 
over  his  moral  creature,  and  give  him  his  law  with  its  two  cardinal 
requirements — loving  God  with  all  his  heart,  and  his  neighbor  as 
himself,  as  the  only  security  for  the  welfare  of  the  universe,  and 
enforce  obedience  to  it  with  the  whole  weight  of  his  authority. 

7.  In  this  view  the  occasion  of  sin  is  the  love  of  conscious  free- 
dom ,  and  a  consequent  disinclination  to  submit  to  the  necessary 


36 


restraints  of  law  and  government.  And  here  it  should  be  noticed 
that  sin  originated  in  the  angels  just  as  the  apostle  represents  it 
as  originating  in  men,  (James  1:14,  15):  “Every"  man  is  tempted 
when  he  is  drawn  away  of  his  own  lust*  and  enticed.  Then  when 
lust  hath  conceived,  it  bringeth  forth  sin.”  Notice  the  several 
points  : 

1.  It  is  “  his  own  lust” — that  is,  it  originates  in  himself  ;  so 
that  the  external  influence,  whatever  it  may  be — whether  the 
devil,  or  wicked  men,  or  circumstances — only  stirs  up  a  something 
that  was  all  the  while  in  him — his  own  lust — something  that  be¬ 
longs  to  him ,  and  was  in  him  before  he  was  tempted.  This  some¬ 
thing  in  the  angels,  we  have  made  out  to  be  a  love  of  conscious 
freedom  •  or,  as  we  say  in  familiar  language — a  love  of  having 
one's  own  way. 

2.  It  is  a  something  that  is  innocent.  It  comes  in  before  the 
sin — it  bringeth  forth  the  sin  ;  so  that  the  sin  comes  in  after  it. 
Therefore,  this  lust — this  occasion  of  sin — is  and  must  be  innocent , 
constitutional  propensity.  And  this  is  precisely  the  view  taken 
in  the  foregoing  discussion. 

The  occasion  of  sin  is  thus  seen  to  be  inseparable  from  free 
agency  under  the  restraint  of  law y  and  some  particulars  respect¬ 
ing  it  are  deserving  of  special  notice. 

1.  It  lies  back  of  voluntary  action,  and  is  therefore  destitute 
of  moral  character — a  mere  constitutional  element.  Therefore, 

2.  It  is  not  at  all  of  the  nature  of  depravity,  nor  does  it  imply 
any  defect  in  the  original  constitution,  and  is  consistent  with 
perfect  innocence,  and  even  holiness.  Christ  was  “  tempted  in 
all  points  like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin.” 

3.  Iu  this  view  every  being  in  the  universe  who  sins,  whether 
man  or  devil,  sins  solely  because  he  dislikes  the  restraint  of  law, 
and  shrinks  from  the  self-denial  necessary  to  obedience.  This  is 
the  occasion  of  the  sin.  The  real  sin,  and  where  all  the  guilt 
centers,  is  the  disobedience  itself — the  act  of  transgression,  the 
determination  to  break  the  law  and  have  his  own  way,  in  exact 
accordance  with  the  wray  in  which  the  prophet  describes  human 
sinfulness — “  We  have  turned  everyone  to  his  own  way.'1'1  (Is. 
53  :  6.)f 


.•  •  Tins  word  lust  in  this  passage  is  not  a  happy  translation  of  the 
original  Greek,  being  almost  invariably  used  in  a  bad  sense;  whereas  in 
the  original  the  world  only  means  innocent  desire,  being  the  same  word 
used  by  Paul  when  he  says,  “Having  a  desire  to  depart  and  be  with 
(must,  and  by  our  Saviour  when  he  says,  “  With  desire  I  have  desired 
to  eat  this  passover  with  you.” 

[Some  perhaps  would  prefer  to  say  that  the  disinclination  to  sub¬ 
mission  grows  out  of  a  love  of  self -gratification  rather  than  the  love  of 
freedom.  But  this  statement  appears  not  quite  sufficiently  general  to 
cover  the  whole  ground;  for  there  appears  to  be  an  inclination  to  resist 


37 


The  law  may  be  a  mere  imperative  of  the  reason  and  the 
conscience,  or  it  may  be  a  command,  rightly  imposed  by  another, 
to  whose  rightfulness,  however,  the  reason  assents  ;  but  in  either 
case  it  is  law ,  coming  down  upon  a  moral  being  with  the  demand 
of  obedience  to  rightful  authority.  In  the  former  case  the  in¬ 
dividual  becomes,  in  the  language  of  the  apostle,  “  a  law  unto 
himself,  his  conscience  also  bearing  witness.”  (Rom  2:  15.)  in 
the  latter  he  comes  under  the  authority  of  another — a  parent, 
guardian,  master,  or  ruler ;  and  the  sin  resulting  from  dis¬ 
obedience  is  always  disobedience  to  rightful  authority — to  law . 
Sin  is  ever  therefore  “  the  transgression  of  the  law.”  “Where  no 
law  is  there  is  no  transgression  ”  (Rom.  4: 15.) 

4.  The  leading  peculiarity  of  this  view  is  that  it  represents 
the  occasion  of  sin  as  inseparable  from  a  free  nature  under  this 
necessary  restraint  of  law,  and  belongs  therefore  to  a  moral  being 
by  virture  of  his  creation  ;  and  is  as  inseparable  from  the  soul  as 
freedom  itself. 

This  view  of  the  origin  of  sin  seems  not  to  have  been  thus 
far  clearly  presented  in  our  theological  treatises  ;  while,  should  it 
be  accepted,  it  will  relieve  the  evangelical  system  of  some  of  its 
profoundest  difficulties. 

Accepting  this  view,  and  the  vital  point  is  demonstrated  that 
an  occasion  of  sin,  being  thus  inseparable  from  a  free  nature,  be¬ 
longs  necessarily  to  the  nature  of  all  moral  beings  who  either  have 
been  or  can  be  created  ;  and  therefore  that  all  newly-created  be¬ 
ings  forever,  will  have  the  same  inclination  to  break  away  from  the 
restraints  of  law  and  government  that  has  already  broken  out 
in  the  sinning  angels  and  men.* 

With  the  existence  and  operation  of  this  element  in  human 
society  we  are  all  familiar.  The  inclination  of  the  whole  world  is 
to  its  own  pleasure.  The  very  first  development  of  the  infant 
mind  is  in  the  direction  of  impatience  of  restraint — he  wants  his 
own  way.  This  is  the  leading  characteristic  of  childhood  also, 
and  is  what  creates  the  necessity  for  parental  authority  in  the 
family.  This  is  the  chief  trouble  in  the  community — that  men 
want  their  own  way,  instead  of  seeking  the  general  good.  This, 
too,  makes  government  necessary  in  the  State ;  and  even  on  the 

authority  as  such,  without  reference  to  any  particular  object  of  self¬ 
gratification — to  refuse  to  obey  just  because  commanded — to  refuse  to  do 
a  thing  just  because  told  to.  Our  statement  also  seems  to  come  nearer 
to  our  Saviour’s  representation  of  the  workings  of  the  wicked  heart — 
“  we  will  not  have  this  man  to  reign  over  us" — implying  a  hatred  of 
authority. 

*Some  objections  to  this  view  will  be  noticed  in  Part  Second.  They  are 
omitted  here  for  the  reason  mainly  that  one  of  the  main  objections,  name¬ 
ly,  the  fact  that  the  Angels  of  Heaven  have  maintained  their  allegiance, 
could  not  well  be  noticed  until  their  existence  and  history  as  the  third 
order  of  moral  beings,  had  been  distinctly  considered. 


38 


broad  field  of  national  experience  the  sole  occasion  of  difficulty  is 
the  preference  of  the  individual  over  the  general  good.  “  For  all 
seek  their  own”  is  the  grand  trouble  of  the  universe.  (Phil.  2  :  21 ) 

PRACTICAL  POINTS. 

To  show  how  fundamental  and  far-reaching  is  this  view  now 
presented  of  the  occasion  of  sin,  a  few  practical  results  will  here 
be  briefly  indicated,  which  flow  directly  from  it,  and  which  will 
be  more  fully  developed  in  the  progress  of  the  work. 

1.  A  quasi  explanation  is  given  of  the  origin  of  sin;  perhaps 
pushing  the  investigation  as  far  as  it  is  possible,  in  the  nature  of 
the  case,  for  it  to  go. 

2.  In  this  view  th q  prime  occasion  of  human  sinfulness  can¬ 
not  be  traced  either  to  Adam  or  the  devil,  but  only  to  the  neces¬ 
sary  nature  of  free  agency  under  the  necessary  restraints  of  law 
and  government. 

3.  If  the  fallen  angels  were  the  first  moral  beings  created, 
and  the  peopling  of  this  world  was  the  next  important  event, 
then,  as  the  best  was  done  for  the  angels  that  could  be,  and  they 
sinned ,  it  follows  that  the  human  race,  in  any  other  possible  cir¬ 
cumstances,  in  which  they  could  have  been  created  and  placed, 
would  also  certainly  have  sinned;  so  that  the  only  question  at  the 
time  of  their  creation  was,  not  how  can  the  race  be  kept  from  sin¬ 
ning,  but  how  to  be  saved  after  they  have  sinned.  This  vital 
point  appears  thus  far  to  have  been  generally  overlooked  in  theo¬ 
logical  investigation. 

4.  This  view  removes  the  occasion  of  our  sin  from  Adam  to 
the  necessary  nature  of  free  agency  ;  thus  relieving  the  connec¬ 
tion  of  mankind  with  him  from  the  odium  of  apparently  perpetu¬ 
ating  sin  ;  thus  also  removing  from  the  evangelical  system,  one 
of  the  most  serious  objections  to  the  doctrine  of  endless  punish¬ 
ment,  namely — That  men  inherit  the  inclination  to  sin  from  a  di¬ 
vinely  instituted  connection  between  them  and  a  depraved  ances¬ 
tor,  and  are  then  to  be  punished  eternally  for  being  sinful. 

5.  The  entire  parental  connection — that  of  Adam  with  the 
race,  and  the  parental  connection  generally — is  thus  seen  to  have 
been  instituted  in  the  interest  of  holiness,  and  not  at  all  for  the 
propagation  and  perpetuation  of  sin ;  seeing  that,  in  this  view,  it 
cannot  originate  it,  and,  therefore,  at  most,  can  only  modify  the 
conditions  of  its  existence,  and,  as  will  appear  hereafter,  can  only 
modify  these  favorably,  that  is,  in  the  direction  of  holiness  and 
submission  to  God.* 

6.  In  this  view,  all  the  moral  and  providential  dealings  of 
God  with  this  world — the  conditions  of  infancy,  the  connection  of 
the  soul  with  a  material  body,  the  progressive  creation  of  the  race, 

*See  Appendix  A. 


39 


the  sufferings  we  endure,  and  even  the  temptations  of  Satan,  will 
be  seen  to  be  all  of  them  in  the  interest  of  salvation — all  designed 
to  modify  favorably  the  conditions  of  human  sinfulness,  and  pave 
the  way  for  repentance  and  pardon. 

These  practical  matters  are  thus  briefly  indicated  merely  for 
the  purpose  of  showing  how  fundamental  and  far-reaching  are 
the  two  points  which  have  been  considered — The  Infancy  of  the 
Moral  System  and  The  Occasion  of  Sin.  Especially  the  view 
presented  of  the  Occasion  of  Sin ,  is  one  whose  importance  can 
hardly  be  over-estimated.  The  fact  that  all  created  beings  from 
their  very  nature  shrink  from  the  restraints  of  law,  and  are,  on 
that  account,  inclined  to  sin,  is  the  distinguishing  feature  of  the 
system  herein  developed,  and  furnishes  the  key,  it  is  believed,  to 
the  right  understanding  of  the  moral  universe.  And  even  as  the 
law  of  gravitation  is  the  key  which  unlocks  the  grand  secrets  of 
the  material  universe  and  gives  the  reason  for  its  beauty,  order 
and  harmony,  so  the  key  which  unlocks  the  grand  secrets  of  the 
moral  universe,  and  gives  the  reason  for  all  in  it  that  is  discord¬ 
ant  and  jarring  and  troublesome,  will  be  found  to  be  this  univer¬ 
sal  tendency  of  free  mind  to  resist  law,  and  thus  to  break  away 
from  the  great  controlling  center — God.  It  is  this  that  ruined 
the  angels,  that  made  the  human  race  a  sinful  one,  that  made  Re- 
demption  necessary, that  dug  the  pit  of  Hell,  and  renders  endless 
punishment  an  indispensible  factor  in  the  progress  and  develop¬ 
ment  of  the  future  universe. 

The  practical  points  above  indicated  will  be  considered  more 
at  length  in  their  proper  place. 

Sec.  5.  Their  Probation . 

The  first  moral  beings,  therefore,  and,  as  we  suppose,  all 
moral  beings,  having  this  innate  tendency  to  break  away  from  the 
control  of  the  Almighty,  would  need,  at  the  outset  of  their  career, 
like  Adam  in  the  garden,  a  trial  of  allegiance.  This  trial  we  term, 
in  theological  phrase,  Probatio7i  •  and  it  is  probably  needed  by 
all  newly-created  beings  as  they  enter  on  their  eternal  existence. 

What  the  nature  and  circumstances  of  this  probation  w  ould 
probably  be,  wre  can  only  conjecture  from  the  recorded  experience 
of  Adam,  the  only  moral  being  of  whose  earliest  history  wre  have 
any  record. 

The  first  commands  which  God  imposed  on  Adam  were  those 
which  fell  in  entirely  with  his  natural  inclinations,  namely,  the 
law  of  marriage  and  the  Sabbath,  and  the  command  to  dress  and 
keep  the  garden.  But  these  commands,  and  any  similar  ones, 
were  no  test  of  allegiance — no  indication  what  he  would  do  should 
his  natural  inclinations  be  crossed.  And,  although,  he  obeyed 
these  commands,  yet  such  obedience  could  have  been  regarded 
by  the  Almighty  with  very  little  satisfaction  as  compared  with 


40 


the  obedience  of  one  who  had  been  confirmed  in  allegiance ;  for 
he  knew,  all  the  while,  how  weak  within  him  was  the  principle  of 
obedience,  and  that  he  was  entirely  unwilling  to  comply  with  all 
his  reasonable  commands.  And  furthermore,  no  such  acts  of 
obedience,  merely ,  would  have  continued  him  in  holiness  ;  for  they 
were  very  far  from  involving  the  requisite  degree  of  submission 
to  the  Divine  will;  and  a  certain  and  proper  amount  of  trial,  as 
his  conduct  afterward  showed,  would  have  been  sufficient,  at  any 
time,  to  induce  him  to  abandon  his  Maker. 

But  what  would  have  confirmed  him  ? 

The  answer  is — Had  he  not  eaten  of  the  forbidden  fruit ; 
had  he  steadily  refused,  at  this  point,  all  solicitations  to  disobedi¬ 
ence,  both  from  his  natural  inclinations  and  the  assaults  of  the 
tempter — in  which  case  he  would  have  resisted  his  natural  incli¬ 
nations,  and  denied  himself  at  the  command  of  God — this  act  of 
obedience,  in  these  circumstances,  would  have  required  such  an 
amount  of  self-denial,  and  would  have  involved  such  a  degree  of 
submission  to  the  Divine  will,  as  undoubtedly  to  have  fortified 
biim  against  all  subsequent  temptation,  and  therefore  have  con¬ 
firmed  him  in  obedience  forever  ;  and  for  this  it  was  that  the  trial 
was  ordained. 

Reasoning,  therefore,  from  analogy,  we  conclude  it  altogether 
probable,  that  every  newly  created  being  will  need  a  similar  pro¬ 
bation  in  order  to  become  confirmed  in  obedience  to  God  ;  and 
that  his  moral  character  forever  will  depend  upon  whether  he  can 
be  induced,  at  the  outset  of  his  career,  to  practice  the  requisite 
amount  of  self-denial  at  t lie  command  of  the  Almighty. 

We  assume,  therefore,  that  God  will  give  every  intelligent 
being,  at  the  commencement  of  his  existence,  a  suitable  trial — a 
probation,  as  an  opportunity  for  him  to  become  confirmed  in 
eternal  obedience  to  himself. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  results  of  this  probation  must  be  de¬ 
cisive.  If  at  this  turning  point,  and  under  a  fair  trial,  the  free, 
moral  agent  resolves  to  obey  God,  his  future  character  will  be 
settled  on  the  side  of  holiness ;  and  this  determined  resistance  to 
sinful  inducement,  will  lay  broad  and  deep  the  foundations  of  his 
everlasting  blessedness. 

It  follows,  also,  that  if  at  this  point  he  disobeys  God,  his 
future  character  will  be  determined  toward  unholiness  and 
misery  ;  and  as  sin  tends  ever  to  perpetuate  itself,  that  there  will 
be  no  hope  of  restoration  to  the  forfeited  favor  of  God,  unless 
God  interpose,  as  he  has  in  this  world,  with  a  scheme  of  recover¬ 
ing  grace. 

The  object  in  imposing  this  trial  at  a  comparatively  early 
period  in  his  history,  may  be  twofold. 

1.  It  may  be  a  matter  of  certainty  to  the  Divine  mind,  should 
such  trial  be  omitted  at  the  outset,  and  could  a  moral  being,  or 


41 


any  number  of  such,  without  it,  be  prevented  from  transgression 
for  any  definite  time,  however  long,  that  sooner  or  later,  there 
would  result  a  far  more  extended  and  disastrous  rebellion,  than 
if  all  such  beings  were  tried  at  the  commencement  of  their  exist¬ 
ence — or  at  least  as  soon  as  their  knowledge  of  the  character  and 
attributes  of  God  and  their  relations  to  him,  had  imposed  upon 
them  the  necessary  degree  of  moral  responsibility. 

2.  At  the  outset  of  his  career  he  may  be  more  likely  to  pass 
the  trial  in  safety. 

It  is  not  at  all  incredible,  that,  at  any  subsequent  period,  his 
relations  to  the  universe  might  become  more  complicated,  the 
obstacles  within  him  and  around  him  to  his  required  submission 
to  the  Divine  will,  increased  both  in  number  and  magnitude,  and 
his  entire  position  more  unfavorable  in  all  respects,  for  becoming 
confirmed  in  holiness.  In  this  view,  a  trial  at  the  outset,  would 
seem  to  be  the  dictate  of  benevolence. 

It  was  probably  necessary,  therefore,  that  the  fallen  angels 
should  have  a  probation, — a  trial  of  their  allegiance  to  God  ;  and 
that  this  probation  should  be  preceded  by  all  the  knowledge  of 
God, — of  his  character,  his  government  and  his  works,  which 
could  be  unfolded  to  them ;  so  that  when  the  trial  of  allegiance 
came  they  would  feel  under  perfect  obligation  to  render  him 
instant  and  unqualified  obedience.  Adam  lived  for  months,  and 
probably  years  before  his  fall,  studying  the  works  and  wonders  of 
the  Great  Architect,  and  thus  reaching  the  point  of  intelligent 
responsibility.  At  least  time  enough  intervened  for  him  to  “  give 
names  to  all  cattle,  and  to  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  to  every  beast 
of  the  field  (Gen.  2  :  19,  20.)  each  name  doubtless  correspond¬ 
ing  with  the  peculiar  appearance  and  habits  of  the  different 
species  as  he  leisurely  studied  and  admired  them.  During  this 
time  he  was  becoming  acquainted  with  the  character  and  perfec¬ 
tions  of  God  through  his  material  works,  which,  with  the  exception 
of  his  firmness  in  the  punishment  of  the  rebel  angels,  furnished 
the  only  field  on  which  those  perfections  had  been  exhibited. 
Similar  to  his  experience  was  doubtless  that  of  the  fallen  angels, 
so  far  as  becoming  acquainted  with  God,  and  their  relations  to 
him  was  concerned.  Ample  time  and  opportunity  were  afforded 
them  for  reaching  the  point  of  intelligent  responsibility. 

Then  doubtless  came  the  trial  of  allegiance,  whatever  it  may 
have  been,  which  was  essential  to  their  confirmed  obedience 
and  eternal  happiness  ;  and  this  required,  perhaps,  that  there 
should  have  been  some  restriction  imposed  upon  them,  similar,  in 
the  object  to  be  secured  by  it,  to  that  imposed  on  Adam  as  the 
test  of  his  allegiance. 

It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  God  imposed  on  the  fallen 
angels  such  a  restriction — the  very  best  which  could  be  imposed 
— one  precisely  adapted  to  their  constitution,  and  the  peculiarities 


42 


of  their  situation,  and  demanded  of  them  compliance  with  it  as  the 
only  possible  security  for  their  future  welfare. 

He  held  up  before  them  the  unending  happiness  which  would 
follow  their  self-denial  and  submission  to  himself  ;  he  represented 
the  sad  consequences  of  their  refusal  to  obey — even  the  fearful 
penalty  of  being  forever  excluded  from  his  favor,  saying  to  them 
in  solemn  and  impressive  language,  “  In  the  day  that  this  com 
mand  is  broken  ye  shall  surely  die,”  and  presented  before  their 
minds  all  possible  motives  to  deter  them  from  transgression. 

The  sad  result  of  this  probation  we  learn  from  the  declara¬ 
tion  of  the  Bible  :  “  The  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate, 
but  left  their  own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting 
chains  under  darkness  unto  the  Judgment  of  the  Great  Hay.” 
(Jude  6.) 

They  sinned  and  fell,  notwithstanding  all  that  was  done  to 
prevent  it.  And  theirs  was  a  melancholy  and  a  dreadful  fall ;  and 
the  more  so  because  it  was  a  hopeless  one,  and  no  possibilit}^  ex¬ 
isted  that  any  provisions  of  mercy  could  save  them  from  their 
doom.  Thus  much  for  their  general  history. 

And  here  the  question  naturally  arises — why  this  result  ? 
Why  did  the  probation  of  perfect  moral  beings  terminate  thus  ? 
This  leads  to  the  consideration  of  the  following  section: 

Sec.  6.  Motives. 

There  is  no  reason  for  supposing  that,  before  the  creation  of 
this  world,  any  influence  could  properly  have  been  brought  to 
bear  upon  moral  beings  to  bind  them  in  affectionate  obedience  to 
God,  but  that  of  simple  motive. 

It  was  doubtless  necessary  that  having  created  them  with 
the  best  original  constitution  they  could  have — created  them  like 
Adam  “in  his  own  image,”  placed  them  in  circumstances  best 
adapted  to  develop  a  perfect  moral  character,  and  brought  them 
under  the  influence  of  all  existing  motives  to  obedience — that 
then,  God  should  leave  them  to  form  their  own  moral  characters 
by  their  own  free  conduct  under  the  influence  of  these  motives  ; 
and  that  the  exertion  of  any  power  or  influence  beyond  this,  ema¬ 
nating  directly  from  God  himself,  as,  for  example,  theinfluenees  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  would  be  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  circum¬ 
stances  of  the  case  inconsistent  with  the  majesty  of  law,  with  the 
stability  of  government,  and  with  the  entire  welfare  of  the  moral 
universe. 

As  regards  the  Holy  Spirit,  its  peculiar  influences  belong  to 
that  scheme  of  grace  and  mercy,  which  has  been  devised  for  the 
recovery  of  the  sinful  in  this  world  through  an  atonement ;  as 
says  the  Apostle,  “  which  he  shed  on  us  abundantly  through 
Jesus  Christ  /”  (Tit.  3  :  G.)  and  there  is  no  reason  for  supposing 
that  they  could  properly  have  been  exerted  upon  the  angels.  In- 


43 


deed,  under  a  system  merely  of  law,  such  as  we  suppose  existed 
previous  to  the  atonement,  to  bring  in  any  extraneous  influence, 
like  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  induce  obedience,  might  only  tend 
to  weaken  the  influence  of  law  over  them,  and  eventually  under¬ 
mine  the  entire  authority  of  the  government. 

To  illustrate — Suppose  a  father  to  lay  some  command  upon 
his  child ;  and  then,  instead  of  enforcing  the  command  by  the 
simple  weight  of  his  authority,  suppose  he  should  bring  in  some 
extraneous  influence  to  secure  obedience.  For  example,  suppose 
he  should  offer  him  an  orange.  What  is  the  consequence  ? 

First — He  weakens  his  authority  and  impairs  his  influence 
over  his  child. 

Secondly — Obedience  cou]d  probably  be  secured  a  second 
time,  in  similar  circumstances,  only  by  means  of  some  additional 
inducement. 

Thirdly — This  method  of  procedure  continued,  would  result 
in  the  confirmed  and  hopeless  rebellion  of  the  child  against  all 
parental  restraint,  as  well  as  lay  the  foundation  of  rebellion  in  the 
entire  family. 

So  in  the  government  of  God.  Under  a  system  of  mere  law, 
to  bring  in  some  extraneous  influence  to  secure  obedience  to  his 
commands,  might  only  tend  to  weaken  the  influence  of  law,  and 
lead  ultimately  to  rebellion.  Or  if  no  evil  consequences  should 
follow  to  those  directly  influenced,  still,  the  knowledge  of  the 
fact,  disseminated  through  the  universe,  that  God  was  thus  se¬ 
curing  the  obedience  of  his  creatures,  might  undermine  the  foun¬ 
dations  of  government  elsewhere. 

In  respect  to  this  world,  as  the  majesty  of  law  has  here  been 
first  sustained  by  an  Atonement,  such  a  result  cannot  be  appre¬ 
hended.  But  to  have  exerted  this  influence  upon  the  angels, 
might  have  been  attended  with  evil  consequences  to  the  entire 
system. 

As  we  know,  therefore,  of  no  other  means  which  God  has 
ever  made  use  of  to  govern  moral  beings,  except  motives  and  the 
influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  as  the  latter  appertain,  so  far 
as  we  know,  only  to  the  economy  of  this  world,  therefore,  there  is 
no  reason  for  supposing  that,  under  a  system  of  mere  law,  such  as 
we  have  every  reason  to  think  existed  previously  to  the  Atone¬ 
ment,  moral  beings  could  have  been  controlled  by  anything  but 
simple  motive. 

Now  it  is  easily  conceivable  that  at  the  dawrn  of  the  moral 
creation,  there  may  not  have  been  a  sufficient  amount  of  motive 
in  existence  actually  to  lead  the  fallen  angels  to  surrender  them¬ 
selves  in  willing  obedience  to  God,  even  though  all  the  motives 
which  the  universe  then  furnished  had  been  accumulated  before 
their  minds. 

Especially  will  this  appear  plausible  when  we  consider  the 


44 


peculiarities  of  their  position,  and  what  motives  were  wanting, 
and  must  have  been,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  to  deter 
them  from  transgression,  and  which  have  since  been  brought  into 
existence. 

1.  They  had  no  conception,  either  from  experience  or  obser¬ 
vation,  of  the  nature  of  suffering ,  especially  of  that  fearful  form 
denominated  punishment ,  and  which  wherever  justly  inflicted,  is 
mingled  ever  with  the  terrible  ingredient  of  remorse. 

2.  They  had  no  such  warning  before  them  to  deter  them 
from  transgression,  as  the  universe  now  has,  in  the  example  of 
beings  sinning  and  receiving  deserved  punishment. 

3.  They  had  no  palpable  evidence  like  this  of  the  veracity 
of  God,  and  that  he  would  be  true  to  his  threatenings,  however 
dreadful. 

4.  They  had,  therefore,  no  such  reason  to  fear  him,  and  to 
look  upon  him  not  merely  as  a  benevolent  Creator,  but  as  a  great 
and  terrible  Jehovah,  which  the  universe  now  has,  and  which 
leads  the  hosts  of  Heaven  to  exclaim,  “  Who  shall  not  fear  thee, 
O  Lord.”  (Rev.  15: 14.) 

5.  And,  furthermore,  they  had  witnessed  no  manifestation 
of  mercy  on  the  part  of  God.  His  compassion  for  the  sinful  had 
never  been  made  known  to  them,  for  there  had  been  no  occasion 
for  its  exhibition.  That  overpowering  disclosure  of  all  that  is 
tender,  melting  and  winning,  which  has  since  been  made  in  the 
sufferings  and  death  of  God’s  only  Son  for  man’s  redemption, 
and  which  furnished  a  motive  for  love  and  obedience  to  God  in¬ 
finitely  surpassing  all  others,  had  never  been  made  to  them.  All 
this  vast  amount  of  motive  has  been  created  by  God’s  dealings 
with  his  moral  universe  since  the  creation  and  fall  of  the  first 
sinful  beings  ;  and  the  conclusion  therefore  is,  that,  at  the  time 
of  their  creation,  there  may  not  have  been  sufficient  motives  in 
existence  actually  to  deter  them  from  daring  the  tremendous  ex¬ 
periment  of  disobedience. 

But  it  may  be  objected  that  in  the  absence  of  such  motives, 
their  conduct  was  excusable,  and  that  they  could  not  justly  be 
punished  for  their  transgression.  Let  us,  therefore,  look  at  the 
other  side  and  see  what  motives  they  resisted,  and  what  an 
amount  of  light  they  sinned  against. 

1.  They  undoubtedly  had  abundant  evidence  that  God  was 
their  Creator. 

The  perceived  exertion  of  his  creative  power  in  the  forma¬ 
tion  of  the  worlds,  together  with  his  own  declarations  to  them, 
would  give  them  abundant  evidence  that  he  was  also  their  Crea¬ 
tor. 

2.  Abundant  evidence  might  have  been  furnished  them  that 
he  was  their  Preserver  also,  on  whom  they  were  ever  dependent 
for  the  continuance  of  existence.  Even  as,  at  his  word,  world 


45 


after  world  and  system  after  system  rose  from  nothing,  so  at  his 
word,  they  may  have  been  seen  to  return  again  to  their  original 
nothingness  ;  and  the  strong  conviction  thus  have  been  fastened 
on  their  minds,  that  all  existence  depended  solely  on  Him  for  con¬ 
tinuance. 

3.  That  he  was  their  constant  and  kind  Benefactor,  they 
would  learn  from  the  happiness  they  themselves  experienced,  and 
which  was  ever  welling  up  within  them  as  from  a  ceaseless  foun¬ 
tain — the  fountain  of  obedience  and  love  to  God  and  of  conscious 
harmony  with  him,  of  which  happiness  he  was  declared  and  be¬ 
lieved  to  be  the  Author,  as  he  had  proved  himself  to  be  the  Au¬ 
thor  of  their  entire  being. 

4.  Abundant  evidence  could  also  have  been  furnished  them 
of  his  perfect  wisdom. 

All  the  evidence  that  we  now  have  in  the  wonderful  adapta¬ 
tion  of  means  to  ends  of  which  our  world  is  full,  was  wide  open 
to  their  inspection.  Nor  could  any  reason  be  discovered  why 
that  wisdom  was  not  infinite. 

5.  Nor  could  there  have  been  the  least  reason  for  limiting  his 
power.  They  saw  before  them  the  same  stupendous  exhibitions 
of  it  which  we  see,  and  must  have  felt  that  the  Divine  energy  was 
adequate  to  the  production  of  all  possible  acts  or  events. 

6.  The  evidence  of  his  perfect  benevolence  may  have  been 
seen  in  the  happiness  he  was  everywhere  diffusing  throughout  the 
lower  orders  of  the  animal  creation — as  well  as  in  the  blessedness 
of  which  they  were  personally  conscious. 

From  this  brief  sketch  of  the  amount  of  evidence  which  they 
must  have  had  respecting  the  character  and  attributes  of  God,  it 
readily  appears  that  they  must  have  been  under  full  and  perfect 
obligation  to  his  love  and  service ;  and  that  any  failure  to  render 
him  instant  and  unqualified  obedience  was  utterly  unreasonable 
and  entirely  without  excuse  ;  for  if,  to  have  good  and  sufficient 
evidence  respecting  a  being  that  he  is  our  Creator,  Preserver,. and 
constant  and  kind  Benefactor,  as  well  as  that,  in  respect  to  his 
general  character,  he  is  entirely  able  and  perfectly  disposed  to 
secure  the  best  ends  by  the  wisest  means ,  does  not  impose  a  full 
and  perfect  obligation  of  love  and  service  to  him,  then  it  is  impos¬ 
sible  to  conceive  that  anything  else  could.  And  yet,  it  was  against 
this  clear  light  that  they  sinned,  and  no  reason  appears,  therefore, 
why  they  did  not  merit  a  condemnation  exactly  proportioned  to 
the  extent  of  their  obligations. 

To  illustrate  this — Suppose  a  teacher  to  be  introduced  for 
the  first  time  to  a  school  of  a  hundred  scholars  of  advanced  stand¬ 
ing.  Suppose  him  to  devise  the  very  best  system  of  rules  for  its 
regulation  and  annex  to  their  violation  appropriate  penalties.  The 
rules  are  reasonable  and  are  seen  to  be  such.  That  they  emanate 
from  rightful  authority  is  not  questioned.  All  feel  under  full  and 


46 


perfect  obligation  to  obey  them.  But  of  the  firmness  of  the  teach¬ 
er  in  punishing  transgression  they  have  no  evidence  either  from 
experience  or  observation. 

In  these  circumstances  it  is  very  probable  that  some  will 
transgress.  What  shall  be  done  with  them  ?  The  teacher  is  com¬ 
passionate  and  would  gladly  overlook  the  offense.  But  can  he  ? 
All  eyes  are  upon  him.  His  own  character  is  at  stake.  The  es¬ 
timation  in  which  he  will  be  held  hereafter’,  the  obedience  of  the 
remainder,  in  short,  the  entire  welfare  of  his  little  realm,  are  de¬ 
pending  upon  his  firmness  at  this  crisis.  He  must  punish  as  he 
has  threatened.  And  who  would  say  that  the  punishment  was 
not  justly  inflicted  1  True,  the  degree  of  firmness  he  possessed, 
not  having  been  tested,  had  not  been  witnessed,  and  could  not 
have  been,  and  the  unpleasantness  of  punishment  had  not  been 
experienced. 

But  who  thinks,  on  this  account,  of  excusing  the  delinquents  ? 
Who  would  say  that  their  punishment  was  not  richly  merited  ? 
They  understood  the  law.  They  saw  its  reasonableness.  They  ac¬ 
knowledged  the  rightful  authority  of  the  teacher.  They  had  abun¬ 
dant  reason  for  believing  him  benevolent.  They  felt  under  perfect 
moral  obligation  to  obey  him.  And  for  these  rsasons  all  would 
admit  that  their  conduct  was  entirely  inexcusable.  Three  things 
in  this  illustration  distinctly  appear. 

1.  The  punishment  inflicted  in  such  circumstances  is  perfectly 

just. 

2.  It  is  absolutely  necessary  to  save  the  character  of  the 
teacher  and  prevent  anarchy  and  insubordination  from  extending 
to  all  under  his  control. 

3.  It  is  in  the  highest  degree  benevolent,  for  by  it  his  char¬ 
acter  for  firmness  is  established,  new  motives  to  obedience  are 
created,  and  this  act  of  justice,  together  with  other  exhibitions  of 
his  character  in  his  dealings  with  the  remainder ,  will  so  win  their 
respect  and  affection,  that  they  will  cheerfully  submit  to  his  au¬ 
thority,  and  their  best  welfare  be  secured. 

So  the  Almighty  would  doubtless  present  himself  before  the 
first  moral  beings,  claim  to  be  their  Creator,  Preserver,  and  Bene¬ 
factor,  and  furnish  them  with  abundant  proof  that  he  sustained 
to  them  such  a  relation.  He  would  give  them  his  Law  with  its 
appropriate  sanctions,  make  them  to  understand  it,  and  see  its 
reasonableness,  and  to  feel  that  he  was  actuated  by  the  most  be¬ 
nevolent  intentions  in  giving  it,  and  convince  them  that  their 
own  best  welfare  would  be  secured  by  yielding  to  it  unqualified 
obedience,  and  thus  lay  them  under  full  and  perfect  obligations  to 
submit  unconditionally  to  his  authority. 

And  in  all  probability,  it  was  in  precisely  such  circumstances 
that  they  transgressed.  And  why  should  not  the  threatened  pen¬ 
alty  be  executed  ? 


47 


They  had  indeed  made  no  trial  of  the  awful  firmness  of  Je¬ 
hovah — they  had  not  before  them  the  example  of  other  beings 
sinning  and  receiving  punishment.  Neither  had  there  been  any 
exhibition  of  his  mercy  in  pardon.  These  and  other  motives, 
since  brought  into  existence,  mny  have  been  wanting.  Still  they 
did  know  and  feel  that  they  were  under  the  highest  conceivable 
obligations  to  love,  serve  and  obey  God ;  so  that  their  sin  was  a 
daring  and  high-handed  rebellion  against  the  authority  of  God, 
and  a  wilful  and  wicked  determination  to  overthrow  him  and  his 
government — as  daring,  wilful,  wicked  and  inexcusable  as  sin,  at 
that  stage  of  the  creation, could  possibly  be.  And  so,  in  the  circum¬ 
stances,  nothing  could  be  done  with  them  but  to  punish  them  as 
they  deserved. 

Indeed,  no  reason  appears  why  it  may  not  be  said  with  equal 
propriety  of  them  as  of  the  heathen  of  our  world — “  The  invisible 
things  of  him  from  the  creation  of  the  worlds  were  clearly  seen, 
being  understood  by  the  things  that  were  made,  even  his  eternal 
power  and  divine  excellence,  so  that  they  were  without  excuse ,” 
(Rom.  1:20.)  and  deserved  the  penalty  inflicted  on  them  for  their 
rebellion.  Their  guilt  was  proportioned  to  the  light  enjoyed,  as 
guilt  always  is,  and  they  were  punished  accordingly. 

It  is  not  seen,  therefore,  why  the  principles  derived  from  the 
foregoing  illustration  may  not  be  equally  applicable  to  the  sin¬ 
ning  angels. 

1.  Their  punishment  was  just. 

2.  It  was  necessary  to  save  the  character  of  the  Lawgiver, 
and  uphold  the  majesty  of  his  government. 

3.  It  was  benevolent ,  because  the  infliction  of  the  threat¬ 
ened  penalty,  would  alone  deter  the  universe  from  a  similar  re¬ 
bellion,  and  would  result  therefore  in  the  prevention  of  far  greater 
suffering. 

The  foregoing  view  appears  to  be  consistent  both  with  the 
Benevolence  and  the  Omnipotence  of  the  Deity. 

First — It  does  not  sacrifice  his  Benevolence,  for  the  reason 
that  it  does  not  appear  that  anything  better  could  have  been 
done  than  has  been  done. 

1.  Not  to  create  intelligent  and  voluntary  beings  at  all, 
would  be  to  lose  the  happiness  which  will  be  secured  by  a  moral 
universe  extending  through  the  endless  ages — a  universe,  there¬ 
fore  of  limitless  value  and  excellence,  because  containing  in  itself 
unbounded  holiness,  benevolence  and  blessedness  multiplying 
evermore.  Hence  the  existence  of  a  moral  system. 

2.  An  infinite  being  cannot  be  created.  Hence  finite  moral 
beings. 

3.  Such  finite  moral  beings  as  exist  are  the  best  which  could 
be  created,  for  they  were  made  in  God’s  own  image,  and  were 


48 

placed  from  the  first  in  tlie  best  possible  position  for  continuance 
in  holiness. 

4.  Such  beings  could  be  governed  by  nothing  but  motives, 
and  all  existing  motives  were  brought  into  requisition,  to  pre¬ 
vent  their  transgression,  and  what  more  could  be  done. 

Neither  in  the  second  place,  does  it  sacrifice  his  Omnipotence , 
but  only  limits  it,  as  it  must  ever  be  limited,  by  the  nature  of 
things  ;  *  and  which  reflects  no  more  dishonor  on  his  perfections, 
than  would  be  done  by  the  position  that  Omrfipotence  can  not 
cause  a  thing  to  be  and  not  to  be  at  the  same  time  ;  for  according 
to  the  foregoing  view, 

1.  Moral  beings  are  such  that,  by  their  very  natures,  they 
can  be  controlled  by  nothing  but  motives. 

2.  The  only  motives  which  will  actually  restrain  them  from 
disobedience  are  those  created  by  the  dealings  of  God  with  other 
moral  beings. 

3.  These  motives  can  not  in  the  nature  of  things  exist,  until 
such  beings  have  been  created  and  have  become  the  subjects  of  such 
dealings,  and  can  not  therefore  exist  at  the  commencement  of  a 
moral  administration  ; — for  motives  drawn  from  the  exhibition  of 
God’s  justice  and  mercy  in  his  treatment  of  sinners,  manifestly 
can  not  exist  before  such  an  exhibition  has  been  made  ;  and 
the  exhibition  cannot  be  made,  until  moral  beings  have  been 
created  and  have  sinned  ;  and  if  sin  has  arisen  for  the  want  of 
such  an  exhibition,  then  it  has  arisen  from  the  absence  of  that 
which,  at  the  commencement  of  a  moral  administration,  can  not 
exist. 

In  this  view  it  appears  to  be  nothing  derogatory  to  the  perfec¬ 
tions  of  the  Deity  to  say  that  the  sin  of  the  Fallen  Angels  could 
not  have  been  prevented  even  by  Omnipotence,  except  by  their 
non -creation.  If  created,  they  would  certainly  sin,  notwithstand¬ 
ing  all  that  could  properly  be  done  to  prevent  it ;  so  that,  so  far 
as  the  Divine  prevention  was  concerned,  their  sin  was  unavoida¬ 
ble. 

Sec.  7.  I Vhy  have  they  not  been  redeemed  ? 

Said  a  ship-carpenter  at  the  close  of  a  preaching  service  in 
the  ship-yard,  in  which  the  wwiter  had  been  expatiating  on  the 
benevolence  of  God.  “  If  God  is  so  good,  why  did  he  not  redeem 
the  Angels  ?”  What  answer  was  given  to  the  question  is  not  now 
remembered;  and  the  incident  is  mentioned  only  to  show  that 
even  the  common  mind  pouders  such  matters,  and,  therefore,  that 
the  discussion  of  the  point  is  not  by  any  means  out  of  place. 

The  Revised  Version  of  Heb.  2:16,  reads  thus,  “  For  verily 
not  of  angels  doth  he  take  hold,  but  he  taketh  hold  of  the  seed  of 
Abraham.” 

*  See  Appendix  B. 


49 


We  learn  from  this  that  no  provisions  of  redemption  have 
been  made  for  them.  Why  not  ?  Not  certainly  from  any  want 
of  benevolence  in  the  Almighty,  nor  from  any  want  of  adequacy 
in  the  provisions  of  redemption,  for  the  atonement  is  an  infinite 
provision.  Very  likely  the  reason  is  two-fold. 

First. — That  the  same  self-will  and  impatience  of  restraint 
which  led  them  at  first  to  reject  the  authority  of  God  and  resist 
his  control, would  have  led  them  still  to  resist  him  and  refuse  sub¬ 
mission  under  any  possible  efforts  for  their  restoration. 

Secondly. — It  may  also  be  true  that  the  confidence  in  God 
necessary  to  repentance  cannot  be  awakened  within  them.  The 
sin  of  the  angels  must  have  been  as  inexcusable  as  sin  could  pos¬ 
sibly  be  at  that  stage  of  the  creation;  for  assuming,  as  we  have,  that 
they  were  the  first  of  created  beings,  no  temptation  could  have 
been  presented  from  without,  and  they  must  have  sinned  from 
mere  wilfulness.  It  was  a  determination  to  abandon  God  and 
defy  his  authority,  as  deliberate  and  wilful  as  such  a  determina¬ 
tion  could  then  be.  Now  here  in  this  world  the  most  aggravated 
forms  of  sin  appear  to  throw  the  ones  committing  them  beyond 
the  possibility  of  recovery.  A  point  in  depravity  is  not  unfre- 
quently  reached  when  the  remembrance  of  past  sin  becomes  so 
fearful  as  to  drive  the  sinner  to  despair.  He  dares  not  hope  for 
mercy  and  leaves  the  world  with  the  certainty  before  him  of  per¬ 
dition,  exclaiming  perchance,  as  did  the  denying  apostate,  Fran¬ 
cis  Spira,  “O  the  insufferable  pangs  of  hell  and  damnation.”  The 
Bible  also  mentions  a  sin  so  peculiarly  aggravated  as  to  ren¬ 
der  it  “  impossible ”  for  him  who  commits  it  “  to  be  renewed  to 
repentance”  (Hebrews  6:4);  that  is,  even  God’s  omnipotent 
Spirit  cannot  renew  him,  for  the  renewal  of  the  heart  is  his  pecu¬ 
liar  office  work.  The  clear  representation  here  is  that  the  commis¬ 
sion  of  this  sin  throws  him,  by  the  very  nature  of  his  mental  and 
moral  constitution,  beyond  the  possibility  of  renewal.  Another 
terrific  declaration  is  that  for  him  who  “  sins  wilfully  after  he 
hath  received  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  there  remaineth  no  more 
sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment 
and  fiery  indignation”  (Hebrews  10:  26,  27).  And  why  may  not  a 
similar  effect  invariably  follow  the  commission  of  the  most  deliber¬ 
ate  sin — sin  not  following  external  temptation — sin  such  as  the 
devil  committed  ?  Who  shall  say  that  to  the  mind  of  the  fallen 
angel  there  comes  not  the  remembrance  of  goodness  unrequited 
and  warnings  unheeded  with  such  fearful  vividness,  unaccom¬ 
panied  by  any  palliating  circumstance,  as  to  render  his  return  to 
God  and  holiness  morally  impossible  ?  We  suppose  this  to  be  the 
exact  condition  of  the  fallen  angels.  Their  sin  is  so  aggravated 
and  their  remorse  so  terrible  that  the  confidence  in  God  necessary 
to  repentance  cannot  be  awakened  within  them,  and  they  are 


50 

bound  thus,  by  the  very  nature  of  their  sin,  to  confirmed  and 
hopeless  impenitence,  so  that  any  plan  of  redemption  for  them 
would  have  been  unavailing. 

Sec.  8.  Their  punishment 

The  punishment  of  the  Fallen  Angels  is  distinctly  asserted 
in  the  following  passages  : 

“  Depart  ye  cursed  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  Jor  the 
devil  and  his  angels .”  (Matt.  25:  41.) 

“  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned,  but  cast  them  down 
to  hell,  and  delivered  them  into  chains  of  darkness  to  be  reserved 
unto  judgment/’  (2  Pet.  2:  4.) 

“  The  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their 
own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains  under 
darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day.”  (Jude  6.) 

“  The  devil  that  deceived  them  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire 
and  brimstone,  where  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are,  and 
shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  forever  and  ever.”  (Rev.  20:10.) 

The  duration  of  their  punishment  and  of  future  punishment 
generally,  will  be  considered  elsewhere. 

It  is  thought  best  in  this  immediate  connection,  though  an¬ 
ticipating  somewhat,  to  notice  a  fact  in  their  history  stated  in 
Rev.  20th  chapter  respecting  Satan  and  his  fallen  hosts:  that  there 
shall  come  a  time  when  he  shall  be  cast  into  “  the  bottomless 
pit,”  and  be  confined  there  “  a  thousand  years  ;  ”  then  after  that 
period,  be  released  from  his  confinement  for  “  a  little  season,”  to 
go  out  and  “  deceive  the  nations.”  Why  be  loosed  at  all?  The 
following  is  merely  suggested:  All  the  present  arrangements  of 
this  world,  and  all  that  may  take  place  during  its  entire  history, 
in  the  view  herein  presented,  are  only  in  the  way  of  preparation 
for  the  Endless  Future,  and  to  lay  its  foundations  securely. 

Now  it  is  possible  that  at  some  time  in  the  coming  ages,  and 
among  future  races,  the  thought  might  come  up,  gradually  ripen¬ 
ing  into  an  extended  opinion — the  same  as  is  now  entertained  by 
the  Restorationists — that  suffering  was  a  remedial  agency  ;  and 
that  if  the  wicked,  after  having  experienced  the  real  terrors  and 
torments  of  perdition,  could  only  be  released  from  their  confine¬ 
ment,  they  would  gladly  avail  themselves  of  this  clemency  of  the 
Almighty,  and  return  to  right  living  and  right  acting.  Under 
this  impression,  they  might  begin  to  question  the  benevolence  of 
their  endless  confinement,  just  as  men  in  the  church  and  out  of  it, 
are  continually  doing  now  ;  and  the  foregoing  experiment  with 
them,  mentioned  in  Revelation,  be  needed  to  correct  any  misap¬ 
prehension  of  this  matter,  proving,  as  it  did,  that  the  character  of 
the  wicked  was  still  unchanged  by  their  confinement  and  punish¬ 
ment  ;  and  were  they  released  from  it,  the  only  result  would  be 
that  they  would  at  once  commence  working  against  God,  and  his 
kingdom,  and  the  general  welfare,  with  the  same  energy,  persist¬ 
ency  and  malignity  as  before. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


MAN. 

The  Angels  have  fallen.  Made  pure  and  perfect  in  their  orig¬ 
inal  constitution  and  placed  in  the  best  possible  circumstances 
for  the  development  of  a  holy  character,  they  have  yet  sinned  and 
been  punished.  The  best  experiment,  therefore,  that  could  be 
made  with  moral  beings  to  secure  their  allegiance  to  God,  has  been 
tried,  and  has  failed.  This  experiment  demonstrated  that  any 
other  race  of  beings,  created  at  this  stage  of  the  moral  universe, 
would  also  sin  ;  for  nothing  better  could  be  done  for  them  than 
was  done  for  the  Fallen  Angels,  either  in  respect  to  original  con¬ 
stitution,  or  external  circumstances  and  surrouu dings. 

To  all  appearance,  therefore,  a  hopeless  moral  midnight  shuts 
down  on  the  universe.  To  all  appearance  free  moral  agents  can¬ 
not  be  kept  from  rebellion  ;  and  no  other  prospect  or  possibility 
appears  but  that  the  universe  must  remain  an  eternal  blank,  with 
no  intelligent  beings  in  it  to  love  and  honor  God,  and  in  which  no 
note  of  praise  and  thanksgiving  will  ever  ascend  to  him. 

But  the  Divine  resources  are  not  exhausted.  The  devil  and 
his  minions  have  indeed  revolted,  and  their  case  is  hopeless,  and 
yet  right  in  the  face  of  this  disaster,  the  Almighty  enters  on  the 
creation  of  the  human  race. 

Two  things  respecting  this  next  race  of  moral  beings  are 
worthy  of  special  notice. 

First. — The  race  will  certainly  be  a  sinful  one  ;  for  nothing 
better  could  be  done  for  them  than  was  done  for  the  Fallen  An¬ 
gels. 

Secondly. — The  sin  of  the  angels  was  committed  in  such  cir 
cumstances  of  aggravation  as  apparently  to  throw  them,  in  the 
very  nature  of  their  mental  and  moral  constitution,  beyond  the 
possibility  of  repentance.  If,  therefore,  the  human  race  should 
be  allowed  to  sin  as  the  Fallen  Angels  did,  and  in  the  same  cir¬ 
cumstances  of  aggravation,  then  to  all  appearance,  their  case  also 
would  become  equally  remediless.  The  same  hopeless  estrange¬ 
ment  from  God  would  result,  the  same  hardness  and  despera¬ 
tion  in  wickedness,  and  the  same  iron  despair  would  fasten  on 
them,  and  throw  them  also  beyond  all  possibility  of  recovery. 

Obviously,  therefore,  the  only  question  was — How  shall  they 
so  sin  as  to  be  saved  afterwards  ?  Their  sin  is  certain  and  una¬ 
voidable,  so  far  as  the  Divine  prevention  is  concerned  ;  but  can 
they  not,  in  some  way,  be  kept  from  sinning  remedilessly  ?  Can¬ 
not  the  circumstances  of  their  sinning  be  so  modified  that  thei  ^ 


52 


ultimate  recovery  shall  not  be  entirely  hopeless  ?  Here  we  are  to 
notice  that  all  the  peculiarities  appertaining  to  the  existence  and 
conditions  of  the  human  race,  have  been  apparently  devised  so  as 
to  modify  favorably  the  conditions  of  human  sinfulness,  and  tLus 
to  render  it  possible  for  them  to  be  saved  after  they  have  sinned. 

The  entire  case  is  this — The  experiment  with  the  Fallen  An¬ 
gels  demonstrated  the  fact  that  the  salvation  of  moral  beings 
under  an  economy  of  mere  Law  was  impossible.  Now  then  God 
turns  him  to  another  and  different  line  of  procedure.  He  creates 
and  plans  and  arranges  this  world  to  introduce  into  it  a  higher 
economy — The  Salvation  of  Sinners  by  Grace — even  by  the  infi¬ 
nite  sacrifice  of  the  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ. 

This  plan  of  Salvation  by  Grace  was  no  afterthought,  intro¬ 
duced  merely  upon  the  event  of  human  sinfulness ;  but  the  sinful¬ 
ness  of  the  race  was  distinctly  foreseen,  and  the  Atonement  de¬ 
cided  upon,  and  all  the  peculiar  circumstances  and  conditions  of 
the  race  devised  from  the  very  outset.  The  world  itself  was 
created  at  first,  and  its  pillars  set  up,  and  its  physical  peculiar¬ 
ities  all  arranged  down  to  the  minutest  particulars,  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  it  was  to  be  the  home  of  a  sinful  race,  in  which  the 
grand  work  of  Redemption  was  to  be  wrought  out.  The  great 
question,  therefore,  respecting  this  world,  as  has  been  said,  was — 
How  so  to  arrange  the  peculiar  conditions  of  the  race  to  be  cre¬ 
ated,  as  to  save  them  from  hopeless  apostacy — to  secure  their 
salvation,  after  they  have  sinned.  These  peculiarities  are  mainly 
as  follows: — 

The  connection  of  the  soul  with  a  physical  body, 

Temptation  by  malignant  beings, 

The  parental  relation, 

The  conditions  of  infancy, 

The  progressive  development  of  the  race, 

The  necessity  for  labor  from  the  curse  of  unfruitfulness  on 
the  earth, 

Providential  dealings  with  men  generally  in  the  way  of  pain, 
suffering,  disappointment  and  trials  of  all  kinds,  as  well  as  bless¬ 
ings  and  mercies  innumerable, 

Moral  government  everywhere — in  the  family,  the  state  and 
the  nation, 

The  Bible,  and  means  of  grace  generally, 

The  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
Temporal  Death. 

The  point  we  have  now  to  consider  is,  that  by  all  these  con¬ 
ditions  and  surroundings  of  the  human  race,  God  is  seeking  so  to 
modify  favorably  the  experience  of  human  probation,  and  the  cir¬ 
cumstances  of  human  sinfulness,  as  to  render  efficacious  a  scheme 
of  mercy  and  salvation. 

In  their  particular  design,  they  are  intended,  either  to  repress 


53 


the  innate  tendency  to  self-will,  which,  as  has  been  shown,  is  the 
prime  occasion  of  sin  in  all  moral  beings  ;  or  to  lessen  the  burden 
of  criminality  for  sin  committed ;  or  to  soften  in  the  human  soul 
the  consciousness  of  guilt,  and  so  make  penitence  a  more  hopeful 
matter ;  or  to  multiply  motives  to  obedience  and  submission  to 
God ;  or  to  increase  the  number  and  efficacy  of  the  warnings 
against  transgression.  In  these  ways  especially,  and  in  others 
less  obvious,  and  yet  not  without  their  influence,  God  is  aiming  to 
bring  every  human  being  into  a  hopeful  situation,  so  that,  if  pos-. 
sible,  he  may  be  induced  to  abandon  his  sinfulness,  and  come  to 
God  by  repentance  ;  and  thus  the  plan  of  redemption  through 
Jesus  Christ  become  efficacious  for  his  final  and  eternal  restora¬ 
tion  to  the  favor  of  God.  In  other  words,  they  are  intended  to 
prepare  the  way  for  the  successful  working  of  the  plan  of  salva¬ 
tion,  and  to  render  it  efficacious  for  human  recovery.  They  are, 
therefore,  every  one  of  them,  devised  and  executed  solely  in  the 
interest  of  holiness  and  salvation,  and  never,  even  by  the  remotest 
implication,  in  the  interest  of  sin,  or  for  its  perpetuation.* 

Sec.  1.  Connection  with  a  Physical  Body. 

In  the  constitution  and  position  of  the  human  race,  there  is 
everywhere  a  manifest  effort  at  confinement,  restriction,  limita¬ 
tion,  restraint.  For  example,  the  mighty  soul  itself,  with  force 
enough  to  energize  a  world,  is  yet  cramped  in  a  diminutive  human 
body.  It  is  then  tied  to  the  surface  of  the  earth  by  the  law  of 
gravitation,  and  moves  from  place  to  place  only  by  a  slow  and 
tedious  locomotion,  when  it  might  have  had  the  speed  of  the 
winds  or  of  lightning.  Also  it  must  come  in  contact  with  the  ex¬ 
ternal  world  only  through  the  medium  of  the  five  senses,  when, 
to  all  appearance,  it  might  as  well  have  had  a  thousand.  Now 
why  is  this  ?  The  following  is  suggested. 

The  occasion  of  sin  being  inherent  in  the  very  nature  of  a 
moral  being,  and  liable  to  an  improper  indulgence,  God  has  com¬ 
pelled  the  soul  to  commence  its  action  in  and  through  the  body 
with  its  restraints  and  crosses,  in  order  to  curb  its  imperious¬ 
ness. 

*In  connection  with  the  general  view  now  presented  it  seems  proper 
to  remark  that  the  expression  of  Dr.  Bushnell  in  his  “  Nature  and  the  Su¬ 
pernatural” — “  The  Anticipative  consequences  of  sin,”  appears  to  be  a  very 
felicitous  one,  but  that  a  wider  range  may  properly  be  given  to  it,  namely 
— that  all  the  arrangements  of  this  world  from  the  beginning — every  par¬ 
ticle  of  matter  that  entered  into  its  original  structure  ;  every  change  in  it 
afterwards;  every  particular  adaptation;  every  law  of  sequence  that 
wrought  out  in  its  onward  process  and  progress  the  condition  of  things  as 
they  were  when  man  was  first  placed  upon  it,  were  all  arranged,  and  de¬ 
signed,  and  set  in  operation,  with  special  reference  to  the  fact  that  the 
race  that  was  to  inhabit  it  would  be  a  sinful  one.  Indeed  this  view  seems 
necessitated  by  the  very  fact  of  God’s  omniscience. 


54 


The  idea  of  some  that  sin  originates  in  the  body,  and  that 
the  connection  of  the  soul  with  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  calamity, 
apart  from  impugning  the  benevolence  of  God,  and  making  him 
the  responsible  author  of  sin,  is  inconsistent  with  facts.  For  the 
desire  to  have  my  own  way  without  restraint  is  not  in  the  body. 
The  body  is  merely  the  instrument  through  which  the  inclination 
of  the  soul  to  have  its  own  way  is  gratified — through  which  it 
acts  out  itself ;  or  rather  the  body,  limiting  and  confining  the 
soul  within  itself,  determines  the  manner  in  which  this  inclina¬ 
tion  shall  work  itself  out,  and  find  satisfaction. 

Undoubtedly,  without  a  body,  the  inclination  to  wilful  indul¬ 
gence  would  be  the  same  as  now,  and  work  out  itself  energetic¬ 
ally  and  disastrously  in  some  form,  even  as  it  is  now  working 
itself  out  in  the  Devil  and  his  angels.  Indeed,  some  of  the  vilest 
of  human  passions,  like  avarice  and  ambition,  envy,  hatred,  covet¬ 
ousness  and  revenge  seem  not  to  be  at  all  dependent  on  the 
body.  Even  inebriety  and  licentiousness  are  only  the  natural 
inclination  to  self-will  and  self-indulgence,  working  out  itself 
through  the  body  in  these  particular  forms. 

Our  view  is  therefore,  that  God  puts  that  soul  that,  in  any 
case,  is  sure  to  become  wilful  and  wicked, — and  even  separate 
from  the  body,  would  perchance  become  a  Devil — into  its  physical 
habitation,  that  its  imperiousness  may  work  out  itself  through  it 
for  its  own  correction,  restraint  and  curbing.  Such  is  his  design  ; 
and  if  in  any  case,  the  arrangement  fails  to  secure  this,  and  the 
man  only  wallows  in  sensual  habit,  and  is  regarded  and  spoken  of 
as  a  slave  of  appetite,  the  fact  is  he  is  a  slave  only  to  internal, 
spiritual  rebellion  against  his  Maker.  It  is  sinful  self-will,  rather 
than  that  physical  habit,  that  masters  him. 

The  real  trouble  with  the  “carnal  mind,” — the  mind  seeking 
its  gratification  in  and  through  the  flesh — is,  that  it  is  “ enmity 
against  God,  and  is  not  subject  to  his  law  ;  and  if  in  any  single 
instance,  it  will  but  submit  itself  heartily  to  Him,  the  habit  of 
self-indulgence,  in  any  form,  will  be  soon  overcome. 

Thus  the  body  is  regarded,  not  as  the  origin  of  want,  desire, 
and  impulse,  but  rather  the  instrument  of  their  gratification — 
the  medium  through  which  the  confined  and  restless  agent  within 
is  ever  acting  out  himself,  and  seeking  satisfaction  ;  and  through 
which  he  is  compelled  to  seek  it,  that  he  may,  in  the  process,  be 
crossed  and  repressed,  disciplined  and  subdued,  and  thus  be 
made  to  learn,  if  possible,  the  great  lesson  of  submission  to  God. 

That  the  physical  conditions  of  men  have  all  been  arranged 
in  the  interest  of  holiness,  is  very  evident  from  that  remarkable 
passage,  Rom.  8  :  20,  21 — “  For  the  creature  was  made  subject 
to  vanity  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him  who  hath  subjected 
the  same  in  hope.  Because  the  creature  itself  also,  shall  be  de¬ 
livered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the  glorious  liberty 


55 


of  the  children  of  God.”  An  extended  and  masterly  exegesis  of 
this  passage,  will  be  found  in  the  Quarterly  Christian  Spectator, 
Yol.  X,  p.  105.  The  view  which  this  writer  presents  of  the  passage 
is  as  follows — “For  the  creature ” — the  human  race  “was  made 
subject  to  vanity ” — to  a  state  of  frailty,  corruption  and  physical 
imperfection,  the  necessary  consequence  of  a  fleshly  constitution, 
— “  not  willingly ” — not  of  choice,  but  contrary  to  all  its  native 
tendencies  and  sensibilities,  “  by  reason  of” — or  through  the  will 
and  direct  arrangement  of  the  Creator,  “  who  hath  subjected  the 
same  in  hope ” — in  the  benevolent  design  and  expectation — “  that 
[a  better  translation  than  because]  the  creature” — the  human  race, 
would,  by  passing  through  this  state,  “  be  delivered  from  the 
bondage  of  corruption,”  and  established  forever  in  the  free  and 
glorious  service  of  God.”  In  which  the  general  truth  is  clearly 
stated  that  the  present  state  of  being,  in  its  physical  aspects  and 
relations,  was  designed  of  God  as  the  means  of  reclaiming  rebel 
souls,  and  confirming  them  in  holiness,  and  that  this  was  the  great 
object  intended  to  be  accomplished  by  the  subjection  of  man  to 
his  present  condition  of  “vanity.” 

How  is  this  done  ?  Answer  : — 

1.  The  gratification  of  irregular  desires  through  the  body 
is  followed  by  inconvenience,  pain,  suffering  and  woe,  so  that  the 
fearful  nature  of  self-indulgence  and  sin,  may  come  to  be  felt  and 
appreciated  by  the  sinning  one. 

2.  The  physical  pains,  suffering  and  calamities  of  the  race 
which  have  come  down  in  history — the  record  of  this  world  as  a 
slaughter  pen  and  a  charnel  house — a  world  of  groans,  anguish, 
tears  and  blood,  all  conspire  to  teach,  through  these  physical  out- 
workings  which  can  be  seen  and  appreciated,  the  dreadfulness  of 
sin ;  and  men  do  thus  receive  a  multitude  of  warnings  against 
committing  it. 

3.  By  the  care,  weakness  and  feebleness  of  the  body,  the 
spirit  is  diverted  in  a  measure  from  itself,  and  the  perception  of 
its  moral  deformity — it  perceives  but  little  of  its  hidiousness  and 
loathsomeness  as  being  in  rebellion  against  God.  The  full  turpi¬ 
tude  of  sin,  if  seen  in  all  its  blackness  and  loathsomeness,  must 
drive  the  sinner  to  despair  of  recovery.  The  full  remorse  which 
a  view  of  its  real  nature  would  enkindle,  would  very  likely,  burn 
with  such  fury  in  his  bosom,  that  the  coolness  and  calmness  nec¬ 
essary  for  penitent  reflection,  could  find  no  place  within  it,  and 
all  idea  of  the  practicability  of  overcoming  it,  and  rising  from  it, 
be  driven  forever  from  his  mind.  Hence  God,  in  his  mercy,  has 
wrapped  the  spirit  in  garments  of  flesh,  and  obscured  the  percep¬ 
tion  of  the  actual  state  of  a  soul  under  the  bondage  of  sin.  Con¬ 
sequently  the  difficulties  that  lie  in  the  way  of  eradicating  the 
power  of  sin,  and  correcting  its  corrupting  influence,  are  but 


56 

feebly  apprehended.  Return,  therefore,  to  God,  appears  not  so 
formidable  a  task. 

4.  The  perception  of  God  himself  in  his  spotless  excellence 
and  purity  is  so  obscured  by  the  fleshly  surroundings  of  the  spirit, 
as  not  to  blaze  too  fearfully  upon  the  degraded  soul.  Hence  the 
infinite  repugnance  between  its  own  polluted  character,  and  the 
perfect  character  of  God,  are  but  dimly  seen,  and  the  difficulties 
of  effecting  a  reconciliation,  and  producing  a  similarity  in  char¬ 
acters  so  opposite  to  each  other,  are  not  therefore,  felt  to  be  so 
great  as  to  drive  to  despair.  “  Could  the  spotless  excellence  of 
God  shine  fourth  in  unclouded  splendor  upon  the  eye  of  the 
spirit,  and  could  its  own  blackness  and  deformity  appear  in  full 
view,  as  they  doubtless  will  in  the  future  world,  is  it  going  too 
far  to  assert,  that  the  declarations  of  eternal  truth  itself,  pro¬ 
claimed  in  tones  of  infinite  love  and  pity,  might  hardly  avail  to 
break  up  the  fell  despair  that  would  stretch  its  icy  bonds  over 
the  soul?” 

5.  This  arrangement  too,  allows  of  mingled  good  and  evil . 
Unmingled  good  would  lead  to  presumptuous  confidence ;  un¬ 
mingled  evil  to  hopeless  despair.  The  fleshly  nature  of  man  ad¬ 
mits  of  the  most  hopeful  combination  of  the  two.  It  permits 
these  also  to  be  varied  to  suit  the  peculiar  nature  of  each  individ¬ 
ual — drawing  one  more  by  the  attractive  power  of  goodness  and 
blessing,  and  breaking  and  subduing  another  by  the  softening 
force  of  suffering. 

6.  Let  it  be  noticed  also  that  all  the  appetites  and  passions 
of  the  body  are  so  arranged,  that  while  the  man  must  decide 
whether  he  will  yield  to  them  in  self-indulgence,  or  resist  them  by 
self-denial,  the  real  point  all  the  while  being  determined  is,  whether 
he  will  submit  to  or  resist  God.  Sin  does  not  take  the  exact 
form  of  personal  resistance  to  God  as  a  personal  being — as  when 
a  child  resists  the  authority  of  the  parent  face  to  face — for  this 
might  so  intensify  guilt  as  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  repent¬ 
ance  ;  but  it  becomes  self-indulgence  or  self-denial  in  respect  to 
bodily  appetites;  but  still,  the  point  which  is  all  the  while  being 
settled  is — will  the  man  choose  his  own  way  of  self  indulgence, 
or  God’s  way  of  self-denial — will  he  submit  or  rebel — will  he  by 
yielding  to  or  “  denying  worldly  lusts,”  be  God’s  friend  or  enemy 
forever  ? 

And  all  the  while  too,  reason  and  conscience,  the  most  ob¬ 
vious  dictates  of  self-interest,  the  pains  and  penalties  of  self-indul¬ 
gence,  as  well  as  the  Spirit  of  God,  are  working  and  urging  in  the 
direction  of  self-denial  and  submission. 

7.  Furthermore,  as  all  the  mental  and  physical  peculiarities 
which  men  have  at  birth — all  their  truly  natural  inclinations  and 
dispositions  are  God’s  work,  it  follows  that  the  peculiar  way  in 
which  each  one  finds  his  inclination  to  independence  and  self-will 


57 


acting  itself  out,  is  the  exact  point  at  which  God  intends  he  shall 
learn  his  life-lesson  of  self-denial  and  submission  to  himself. 

Hence  his  heart’s  idols  will  ever  lie  in  the  line  of  his  inclina 
tions,  and  his  crosses  and  trials  consist  in  the  necessity  of  relin¬ 
quishing  them  ;  and  so  God’s  discipline  as  well  as  his  own  heart- 
struggles,  will  ever  cluster  about  the  sinful  way  to  which  he  finds 
himself  especially  inclined — “  the  sin  that  does  so  easily  beset 
him.”  Here  is  where  his  natural  independence  and  inclination  to 
have  his  own  way,  come,  as  it  were,  to  the  surface,  where  they  can 
be  reached  ;  and  here,  therefore,  he  will  find  his  main  life-work  of 
self-conquest — the  field  on  which  the  subjugation  of  that  self-will 
is  to  go  on  and  be  consummated,  if  he  is  ever  to  become  a  child 
of  God  and  an  heir  of  heaven. 

For  example,  if  one  finds  himself  especially  inclined  to  world¬ 
liness — to  money-loving  and  money-getting,  then  can  he,  in  the 
best  manner,  find  his  way  to  submission  and  sanctification,  to 
holiness  and  God,  by  subduing  this  inclination.  If  to  pleasure 
seeking,  then  the  lesson  of  submission  is  to  be  best  learned  by 
subduing  this  inclination.  If  the  race  of  ambition  be  the  most 
tempting,  then  this  will  be  the  best  field  of  conflict.  If  a  violent 
temper  seeks  to  master  him,  then  here  will  be  his  struggle.  If 
some  sensual  indulgence  calls  for  gratification,  then  submission  to 
God  is  to  be  most  directly  reached  by  “  denying  this  ungodliness 
and  worldly  lust.”  And  every  one  should  feel  that  the  peculiar 
occasion  of  his  life  conflict — “  the  sin  that  does  most  easily  beset 
Aim” — the  particular  self-denial  to  which  he  is  called,  is  the  one 
through  which  he  is  to  find  his  way  to  God  if  he  ever  does  find 
it ;  and  that  he  can  learn  his  life-lesson,  and  secure  his  final  salva¬ 
tion  in  no  better  way  than  by  resistance  to  this. 

Moreover,  under  the  pressure  of  this  internal  conflict,  he 
should  not  grieve  on  account  of  its  severity,  and  lament  his  hard 
lot,  and  sigh  for  deliverance,  as  though,  if  this  burden  were  only 
lifted  he  would  be  at  peace  ;  for  then  some  other  trial  equally  dis¬ 
agreeable  and  equally  hard  to  be  borne,  would  become  indispen¬ 
sable  still  to  his  moral  training  ;  and  it  is  his  privilege  to  believe 
that  God  has  arranged  his  life-trial  for  him  in  the  best  manner  to 
save  him,  and  incorporated  into  it  no  unnecessary  element  of 
bitterness.  Hence  no  alternative  is  left  for  him  but  patient  self¬ 
conquest  in  God’s  appointed  way,  “  working  out  his  own  salva¬ 
tion”  even  as  “  God  works  in  him  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good 
pleasure.” 

Man,  therefore,  was  made  subject  to  his  physical  surround¬ 
ings,  and  to  all  the  temptations  necessarily  accompanying  his 
earthly  condition,  not  that  he  should  yield  to  these  temptations 
and  inclinations,  but  resist  them,  and  by  resisting  them,  conquer 
self-will  and  thus  learn  the  great  lesson  of  self-renunciation,  and 
reach  at  length  that  loftiest  pinnacle  of  spiritual  elevation — that 


58 


glorious  liberty  of  sanctification  which  says  ever,  “  Mot  my  will 
but  thine  be  done.” 

In  this  view,  the  connection  of  the  soul  with  the  body  is 
aimed  against  sin,  and  is  intended  solely  for  its  correction  and 
removal,  and  not  for  its  encouragement  and  aggravation.  And 
indeed  all  the  physical  surroundings  of  the  human  soul,  so  far  as 
they  result  from  the  Divine  arrangement,  unmodified  by  the 
wicked  perversion  of  them  by  the  man  himself,  are  seen  to  work 
ever  and  only  in  the  direction  of  salvation. 

Sec.  2. — Temptation  by  Malignant  Beings. 

As  the  fact  of  temptation  by  malignant  beings  is  clearly  re¬ 
vealed  in  the  Bible,  the  view  is  not  unfrequently  entertained  that 
human  sinfulness  is  due  primarily  to  this  temptation,  instead  of 
being  merely  modified  by  it;  and  the  permission  of  it  becomes, 
therefore,  in  some  minds,  an  objection  to  the  justice  of  endless 
punishment — God  permitting  men  to  be  tempted  to  sin,  and  then 
punishing  them  for  following  the  temptation.  How  is  this  objec¬ 
tion  to  be  met? 

1.  A  Personal  Devil. 

“  The  doctrine  of  a  Personal  Devil  is  absurd,”  says  one.  But 
why  any  more  absurd  that  a  moral  being  should  have  sinned 
against  God  in  past  ages,  than  that  such  beings  should  now  sin 
against  him,  here  in  this  world  ? 

But  the  devil  is  powerful  as  well  as  malignant,  and  has  un¬ 
controlled  sway  over  men  ;  and  the  weakness  of  human  nature  is 
unequally  matched  against  the  cunning,  daring  and  desperation 
of  such  an  antagonist. 

This  contradicts  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Scriptures.  They 
represent  him  as  being  completely  under  the  Divine  control.  In 
the  recorded  interview  between  Satan  and  the  Almighty  in  the 
book  of  Job,  Satan  appears  limited  at  every  point  by  the  Divine 
permission.  Satan  charges  Job  with  hypocrisy,  and  desires  to 
try  him  in  order  to  prove  it.  God  says  first,  “take  all  that  he 
hath,”  but  touchnot  him;  and  Satan  must  obey.  At  the  second  in¬ 
terview  the  Divine  permission  is,  that  Satan  may  do  his  worst,  in¬ 
side  of  taking  life — “  Behold  he  is  in  thine  hand,  but  save  his 
life;  ”  and  Satan  could  not  go  beyond  this.  The  entire  record 
demonstrates  that  devilish  malignity  is  ever  held  firmly  in  check 
by  the  Almighty.  Even  the  devils  could  not  destroy  a  herd  of 
swine  without  the  permission  of  the  Savior. 

2.  Temptation  in  Eden. 

Why  was  this  permitted  ? 

1.  For  one  thing  doubtless,  to  diminish  the  deliberation  and 
wilfulness  and  consequent  enormity  of  the  sin  of  our  first  parents. 


59 


In  the  view  we  are  taking,  they  would  have  sinned  any  way  ;  and 
without  this  external  temptation,  would  have  sinned  in  a  manner 
similar  to  that  of  the  fallen  angels,  or  with  an  equal  degree  of 
wilfulness  and  aggravation.  Here  we  find  a  reason  why  the  temp¬ 
tation  in  Eden  was  a  benevolent  arrangement  as  permitted  by  the 
Almighty.  Adam,  left  to  himself,  would  undoubtedly  have  sinned 
as  did  the  angels,  and  like  them  have  been  thrown  beyond  the 
possibility  of  recovery.  It  is  not,  therefore,  at  all  improbable  that 
God  permitted  the  rebel  Fiend  to  act  out  his  malignity  and  press 
the  temptation,  that  he  might  thus  diminish  the  turpitude  of 
Adam’s  transgression,  by  letting  the  Devil  divide  with  him,  as  it 
were,  the  burden  of  its  criminality,  and  thus  lessen  correspond¬ 
ingly  the  burden  of  conscious  guilt,  and  prepare  the  way  for  his 
seeking  and  obtaining  pardon. 

At  all  events,  this  appears  from  the  Bible  narrative  to  have 
been  the  actual  result.  When  God  charged  Adam  with  his  sin, 
he  evidently  felt,  in  giving  his  answer,  that  the  blame  was  not 
entirely  his  own.  He  does  not  plead  innocence,  but  throws  back 
the  blame  in  part  upon  the  woman,  and  she,  in  like  manner,  upon 
the  serpent  ;  and  it  should  be  especially  noticed  that  God  pro¬ 
nounces  the  sentence  accordingly ;  by  far  the  heaviest  curse  fall¬ 
ing  upon  the  latter  as  being  the  prime  instigator  of  the  rebellion. 
To  sin  as  Adam  did,  from  the  solicitations  of  a  beloved  companion, 
involved  less  of  criminality  than  to  sin  as  Eve  did  from  the  temp¬ 
tation  of  the  Devil ;  and  to  sin  as  she  did,  was  less  criminal  than 
to  sin  as  the  Devil  did ;  and  therefore  to  secure  this  alleviation 
of  crime,  was  doubtless  one  design  of  the  temptation. 

2.  Another  probable  design  closely  connected  with  the  fore¬ 
going  was,  to  make  Kepentance  possible. 

The  most  aggravated  forms  of  sin,  as  we  have  seen,  appear 
to  throw  the  one  committing  them  beyond  the  possibility  of  re¬ 
pentance  and  reformation.  [Heb.  6  :  4 — 6.] 

Hence,  had  our  first  parents  been  allowed  to  sin  as  the  angels 
did,  no  reason  appears  why  their  sin  would  not  have  been  fol¬ 
lowed  by  a  like  result,  and  the  burden  of  conscious  guilt  have 
been  such  that  they  too  would  have  been  thrown  by  it  beyond  the 
possibility  of  repentance.  But  to  permit  the  Devil  to  act  out  his 
wickedness  in  tempting  them,  as  he  desired  to,  would  very  likely, 
so  mitigate  their  sin,  so  qualify  its  deliberation,  and  so  lessen 
remorse  for  it,  that  they  could  be  brought  hopefully  within  the 
reach  of  recovering  grace.  In  this  view7,  the  temptation  in  Eden 
was  indispensable  to  a  successful  plan  of  salvation  ;  and  we  reach 
the  conclusive  vindication  of  its  benevolence  in  the  following  state¬ 
ment—  Temptation  is  possibly  necessary  to  the  efficacy  of  Redemp¬ 
tion. 


60 

3.  Benevolence  of  Temptation  Generally. 

We  notice  in  the  next  place  that  temptation  by  malignant 
beings  may  now  be  permitted  only  for  benevolent  reasons.  True, 
the  strength  of  it  has  been  greatly  diminished.  The  power  of 
the  Tempter  has  been  broken.  He  never  now  takes  a  visible 
form,  nor  speaks  in  an  audible  voice,  nor  should  we  be  aware  of 
the  influence  he  is  exerting  in  the  world,  apart  from  the  declara¬ 
tions  of  the  Bible.  Still,  such  temptation  exists  ;  and  may  now  be 
permitted,  in  connection  with  other  things,  for  the  purpose  of 
modifying  favorably  the  conditions  of  human  sinfulness. 

1.  It  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  sin  is  not  due  ‘primarily 
to  such  temptation  ;  for  in  the  view  we  are  taking,  men  will  sin 
any  way ;  and  without  this  temptation  by  malignant  beings,  will 
sin  as  the  Devil  did  in  the  beginning — from  the  mere  impulses  of 
the  original  constitution — the  love  of  independent  action  ;  and, 
therefore,  that  this  temptation  is  not  the  origin  of  the  sin. 

2.  Nor  have  we  any  reason  for  supposing  that  Satan  is  ever 
permitted  so  to  tempt  men  that  they  have  not  abundant  ability  to 
resist  him ;  nor  that  any  temptation,  if  resisted,  would  not  give 
the  enduring  spirit  the  noblest  impulse  heavenward.  Says  the 
apostle  James,  <£  Blessed  is  the  man  that  endureth  temptation.” 
(James  1  12.) 

3.  This  temptation  undoubtedly  diminishes  the  turpitude 
of  crime.  Granting  that  it  never  wholly  excuses  it,  yet  the  fact 
that  the  question  whether  it  does  thus  diminish  it,  is  so  often  de¬ 
bated,  shows  that  men  have  a  conviction  that  sin  is  favorably  mod¬ 
ified  by  very  severe  temptation. 

For  example — When  a  young  man  is  led  into  wrrong  doing 
by  wicked  companions  older  and  more  experienced  than  himself, 
men  pity  him.  They  never  wholly  excuse  him,  but  have  towards 
him  a  feeling  of  compassion  as  well  as  of  condemnation  ;  and 
make  his  wicked  associates,  who  led  him  into  sin,  divide  with  him 
the  burden  of  its  criminality.  They  feel  that  in  some  degree  he 
is  excusable.  And  their  decision  is  right.  So  reason  the  judge 
and  the  jury  when  he  is  brought  to  trial,  and  recommend  him  to 
mercy  as  they  do  not  his  older  and  more  hardened  tempters. 

Also  the  young  man  himself,  in  reviewing  his  conduct,  has  his 
remorse  softened  by  this  particular  aspect  of  the  case — the  pecul¬ 
iarity,  unexpectedness  and  severity  of  the  accompanying  temp¬ 
tation.  Hence,  penitence  is  more  readily  awakened  within  him. 
He  is  not  the  hardened  criminal  whom  no  appeals  can  reach,  but 
the  hopeful  on,e  whom  warning  and  encouragement  may  lead  back 
to  the  paths  of  rectitude. 

Now  apply  these  general  principles  to  the  temptation  of  men 
by  malignant  spirits.  For  aught  that  can  be  said  to  the  contrary, 
the  Devil  and  his  minions  may  be  allowed  still  to  work  out  their 


61 


malignity  in  tempting  men  for  the  same  reason  that  the  Devil  was 
allowed  in  Eden — to  diminish  the  turpitude  of  human  sinfulness, 
to  soften  in  the  human  mind  the  conviction  of  criminality,  and  to 
make  penitence  a  more  hopeful  matter  ;  so  that  on  the  whole, 
temptation  is  permitted,  in  the  case  of  each  individual,  only  in 
that  way  and  to  that  extent,  which  will  best  work  to  save  him. 

4.  In  case  the  temptation  is  unresisted,  we  have  no  reason 
for  supposing  it  any  worse  for  the  man  than  if  he  had  sinned  from 
the  mere  impulses  of  his  original  constitution. 

Even  in  case  he  follows  the  suggestion  of  the  Adversary,  and 
goes  down  with  him  to  perdition,  it  may  still  be  true,  that  the 
very  fact  of  his  temptation  will  mitigate  the  torment  of  his  un¬ 
ending  remorse. 

5.  In  the  case  of  the  Christian,  the  temptation  may  need  to 
be  continued  after  conversion,  in  order  to  indurate,  toughen  and 
consolidate  Christian  principle ;  to  build  up,  by  persistent  and 
long  continued  resistance  to  it,  a  character  of  sufficient  solidity 
and  permanence  to  become  in  the  highest  degree  efficient  in  God’s 
service. 

Nor  is  temptation  permitted  beyond  what  is  necessary  to 
this  ;  so  that  for  a  man  to  find  fault  with  his  own  peculiar  tempta¬ 
tions,  is  to  complain  of  that  which  is  indispensable  to  his  highest 
usefulness. 

6.  Another  probable  reason  why  the  fact  of  temptation  by 
malignant  beings  has  been  revealed,  is  to  secure  the  requisite 
degree  of  watchfulness  and  carefulness.  Were  a  man  traveling 
alone  through  our  western  wilderness,  and  knew  that  the  wily 
savage  was  on  his  track,  what  watchfulness,  carefulness,  and  pre¬ 
cautions  of  all  kinds  would  the  knowledge  of  the  fact  engender. 
He  would  eat,  drink  and  sleep  in  fear ;  and  would  literally  work 
out  his  temporal  salvation  “  with  fear  and  trembling,”  just  as  men 
are  now  exhorted  to  work  out  their  spiritual  salvation  ;  for  it  is 
only  by  this  constant  watchfulness  that  the  wicked  heart  can  be 
kept  from  yielding  to  temptation ;  and  the  knowledge  that  the 
Adversary  of  souls  “goeth  about  as  a  roaring  lion”  to  devour  him, 
and  has  his  malignant  eye  glaring  ever  upon  him,  and  is  desiring 
to  “have  him,”  can  but  result  in  stirring  him  up  to  increased  ac¬ 
tivity  and  watchfulness. 

7.  The  knowledge  of  this  fact  will  also  greatly  stimulate  to 
prayer  for  the  help  of  the  Almighty  in  this  extremity,  and  the 
heart  will  naturally  find  expression  in  the  petition  provided  for 
such  an  occasion — “  Lead  us  not  into  temptation,  but  deliver  us 
from  the  Evil  One.”  And  the  soul,  flying  thus  continually  to  God 
as  the  only  refuge  from  the  assault,  will  reach  at  length,  this  last, 
grandest,  and  most  precious  experience  of  the  Christian — that  he 
shall  seek  his  safety  and  blessedness  in  constant  and  intimate 
companionship  with  him. 


62 


Let  no  one,  therefore,  reproach  the  benignant  providence 
under  which  man  is  assailed  by  temptation.  Let  him  remember 
that,  however  much  he  may  have  deprecated  its  existence,  still 
the  permission  of  it  is  the  dictate  only  of  benevolence — saving 
him,  as  very  likely  it  does,  from  a  sin  that  would  otherwise  bind 
him  to  hopeless  retribution,  and  preparing  the  way  for  his  accept¬ 
ance  of  the  terms  of  mercy  and  salvation. 

Sec.  3.  The  Parental  Relation. 

The  main  design  here  will  be  to  show  that  the  parental  rela¬ 
tion  is  designed  and  adapted  to  repress  sin  instead  of  perpetuating 
it. 

1.  We  need  not  trace  human  sinfulness  primarily  to  the  pa¬ 
rental  relation,  as  is  commonly  done  ;  for  the  devil  and  Adam  both 
sinned  without  any  such  connection  ;  and  because  the  occasion  of 
sin,  a3  we  have  seen,  is  found  in  the  necessary  nature  of  free 
agency. 

2.  Nor  have  we  reason  for  believing  that  the  occasion  of  sin 
has  been  aggravated  by  the  parental  connection.  It  has  evidently 
been  modified  by  it,  so  that  the  sin  of  the  child  is  apt  to  take  the 
same  form  as  that  of  the  parent ;  but  it  would  have  taken  some 
form  without  this  parental  connection — perhaps  a  worse  one,  as 
it  has  in  the  devil.  So  that  there  is  no- evidence,  either  from  rea¬ 
son  or  the  Scriptures,  that  God  has  instituded  the  parental  rela¬ 
tion  to  help  on  sin,  or  thrown,  by  means  of  it,  any  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  holiness.  Indeed,  whatever  be  the  connection  between 
Adam  and  his  posterity,  inasmuch  as  God  is  the  author  of  it,  it 
must  have  been  designed  to  modify  favorably  the  conditions  of 
human  existence. 

3.  We  notice  that  the  parental  connection  is  apparently  de¬ 
signed  at  every  point  to  repress  sin.  Lor  example,  the  parent  is 
compelled,  at  the  very  outset,  to  curb  the  self-will  of  his  child  in 
order  to  derive  any  pleasure  from  his  companionship.  He  must 
either  subdue  him  or  be  subdued  by  him.  The  infant  cannot  con¬ 
trol  himself,  for  he  has  no  reason  or  judgment ;  and  therefore  the 
parent  must  do  it.  God  has  compelled  him  to  do  it  by  the  very 
conditions  of  the  infant  mind.  But  notice,  in  so  doing  the  parent 
represses  the  occasion  of  sin ,  and  weakens  its  power  over  the 
child,  and  works  thus,  at  the  very  outset,  against  this  most  terrific 
obstacle  in  the  way  of  his  salvation. 

4  The  entire  machinery  of  domestic  life — its  tenderness  and 
love — is  designed  to  educate  the  child  to  affection.  The  mutual 
dependence  and  helpfulness  of  the  family  arrangement  tend  in  the 
most  striking  manner,  to  educate  him  both  to  see  and  feel  the 
nature,  the  duty,  and  the  happiness  of  loving ,  and  thus  to  under¬ 
stand  the  nature  and  reasonableness  of  that  first  and  great  com¬ 
mandment,  “Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God.” 


63 


5.  But  the  beauty  and  excellence  of  the  parental  relation 
come  out  pre-eminetly  in  this,  that  it  gives  the  parent  the  oppor¬ 
tunity  of  teaching  the  child  submission  to  parental  authority , 
which  above  all  other  human  instrumentalities,  prepares  the  way 
for  his  submission  to  God  ;  *  so  that  on  the  whole  no  reason  ap¬ 
pears  why  auy  individual  of  the  human  race  does  not,  on  account 
of  the  parental  relation,  come  to  the  point  of  moral  and  respons¬ 
ible  conduct  with  the  conditions  of  his  probation  greatly  improved 
over  those  of  Adam  or  the  fallen  angels,  and  in  more  favorable 
circumstances  than  either  for  securing  his  final  salvation. 

Sec.  4.  The  Conditions  of  Infancy. 

The  character  of  the  infant  at  birth  is  neither  sinful  nor  holy 
— not  sinful  because  he  has  transgressed  no  law  ;  and  not  holy 
because  he  has  obeyed  none  ;  he  is  simply  innocent. 

And  yet  in  every  child,  as  we  have  seen,  there  is  a  constitu¬ 
tional  unwillingness  to  submit  to  the  proper  and  necessary  re¬ 
straints  of  law  and  government.  Not  at  all  as  a  defect,  but  grow¬ 
ing  out  of  the  very  nature  of  free  agency,  and  as  inseparable  from 
the  soul  as  freedom  itself. 

Now  we  are  to  notice  that  the  conditions  of  infancy  appear 
to  be  arranged  in  a  most  remarkable  degree,  to  confine,  restrain 
and  keep  down  this  innate  tendency  to  independent  action.  No¬ 
tice, 

1.  That  the  infant  mind  is  started  at  zero — at  nothing — and 
progresses  by  a  gradual  development.  The  result  is  that  he  can¬ 
not  have  his  own  way.  He  has  numberless  bodily  wants  that  he 
cannot  express,  and  which  must  remain  unsatisfied.  Moreover, 
through  all  the  forming  period  of  childhood  he  must  submit  to 
the  control  of  others.  He  must  be  restrained  in  a  thousand  ways 


*  But  parents  do  not  always  take  this  course.  They  not  unfrequently, 
instead  of  directly  subjugating  the  child  to  their  own  will,  try  the  plan 
of  playing  off  one  side  of  the  constitutional  nature  against  the  other — the 
affectionate  impulses  against  the  impatience  of  restraint ;  and  by  coaxing, 
flattery,  caresses  and  appeals  of  various  kinds,  contrive  to  “  manage”  the 
child  for  a  time  without  the  assertion  of  authority  ;  but  it  turns  out  a  mis¬ 
erable  experiment  in  the  end.  The  child  soon  ceases  to  care  for  caresses 
or  any  thing  but  his  own  way.  A  parent  may  secure  the  obedience  of  a 
child  of  remarkable  susceptibility,  with  tolerable  uniformity,  for  some 
years,  in  this  way.  When  obedience  is  refused,  a  few  words  of  a  pecu¬ 
liarly  tender,  persuasive  and  affectionate  kind  will  move  to  tears,  and  in¬ 
duce  obedience,  while  true  parental  authority  is  never  enforced.  But  in 
time,  these  delicate  chords  of  sensibility  will  begin  to  lose  their  sensitive¬ 
ness  by  being  so  often  appealed  to,  or  else  the  untamed  will  will  outgrow 
them,  and  then  there  will  be  nothing  to  restrain.  Submission,  as  a  matter 
of  duty  and  necessity,  having  never  been  enforced,  the  child  will  in 
all  probability,  grow  up  headstrong  and  reckless,  wilful  and  disobedient, 
and  eventually  become  utterly  abandoned. 


64 


and  ten  thousand  times  before  he  reaches  the  period  of  accounta¬ 
bility,  in  order  to  keep  him  from  self-destruction.  Indeed,  the 
entire  period  of  infancy  and  childhood  is  one  continued  experi¬ 
ence  of  crossing,  trial,  and  subjugation,  kept  up  almost  without 
intermission  during  his  waking  hours.  Now,  why  all  this  train¬ 
ing  previous  to  accountability?  The  answer  is  that  all  this  pro¬ 
cess  of  restraint  and  curbing  is  precisely  analogous  to  the  re¬ 
straint  of  God’s  law,  when,  farther  on  in  life  and  at  the  age  of  ac¬ 
countability,  that  law  meets  him,  and  is  doubtless  designed  to 
prepare  the  way  for  his  submission  to  its  commands. 

2.  From  the  gradual  unfolding  of  the  infantile  powers,  he 
becomes  a  sinner  with  the  least  possible  degree  of  deliberation ; 
therefore,  with  the  least  possible  violation  of  conscience,  and  with 
the  least  possible  blunting  of  the  sensibilities ;  and,  therefore, 
with  fewer  obstacles  to  be  overcome  in  the  work  of  recovery. 

3.  Also,  man  never  remembers  the  time  when  he  became  a 
sinner — when  he  first  arrayed  himself  against  the  Almighty.  The 
fallen  angel  has  that  dreadful  time  ever  in  remembrance,  and  its 
appalling  wickedness  is  doubtless  one  element  in  his  hopeless  de¬ 
spair.  Adam  also  had  such  a  time  to  remember,  and  it  might 
have  driven  him  to  a  like  despair  had  not  his  temptation  softened 
within  him  the  consciousness  of  guilt.  But  all  men  are  now 
spared  this ;  for  the  time  when  sin  was  first  entered  on  is  lost 
amid  the  confusion  of  early  and  feeble  impressions  ;  and  thus  one 
great  obstacle  to  repentance  is  prevented. 

4.  Moreover,  his  first  sinful  acts  are  in  disobedience  to  pa¬ 
rental  authority  only,  and  not  God’s;  and  this  softens  in  the  mind 
the  conviction  of  criminality,  and  makes  penitence  more  hopeful. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  men  in  this  world  become  sinners  in 
the  most  favorable  circumstances  for  recoverv  ;  and  so  the  entire 
conditions  of  infancy  work  only  in  the  direction  of  salvation. 

DEATH  IN  INFANCY. 

How  about  those  who  die  in  infancy  ?  Will  the  occasion  of 
sin  in  them  develop  itself  elsewhere?  If  not  actually  sinful  at 
death,  how  can  they  be  saved  through  the  atonement?  And  if 
not  saved  through  Christ,  how  can  they  learn  the  “  new  song  ?  ” 
Answer : 

The  probability  is  that  the  dying  infant  is  committed  at  once 
to  the  care  and  guardianship  of  the  angels — their  angels.” 
(Matt.  18:  10)  and  by  them  instructed  in  all  that  they  them¬ 
selves  have  learned  of  the  wonders  and  glories  of  redemption, and 
is  brought  under  the  influence  of  all  those  motives  which  have 
been  necessary  to  confirm  themselves  in  obedience  to  God,  and 
that  in  this  way  it  becomes  established  in  holy  living  like  any 
other  newly-created  being  in  the  future  ages  of  the  universe. 


65 


The  work  of  redemption,  in  such  a  case,  would  avail  to  keep 
the  infant  from  sinning,  instead  of,  as  in  this  world,  delivering 
the  soul  from  the  power  of  actual  sin  ;  but  in  each  case  the  glory 
of  his  final  salvation  will  be  due  to  the  great  Savior,  and  the 
praises  of  redeeming  love  be  chanted  alike  by  all. 

Sec.  5.  Other  Aspects  of  Human  Probation. 

1.  The  race  has  been  constituted  on  the  principle  of  a  pro¬ 
gressive  development ,  instead  of  being  created  all  at  one  time,  the 
result  being  that  men  can  profit  by  the  experience  of  the  past — 
the  record  of  history — and  thus  be  made  sure  of  the  natuie  and 
results  of  improper  conduct  without  the  necessity  for  a  personal 
experience;  may  know  assuredly  that  vice  is  calamitous  in  its 
effects,  and  that  sin  ruins;  and  ma}7,  learn  also,  from  the  same  rec¬ 
ord,  that  “  wisdom’s  ways  are  ways  of  pleasantness  and  all  her 
paths  are  peace.”  But  above  all  these,  men  may  learn  the  grand 
record  of  Redemption  as  it  has  been  unfolded  all  along  the  track 
of  centuries,  from  the  first  obscure  promise  in  Eden  down  through 
the  light  of  prophecy  to  the  coming  of  Christ  himself,  and  the 
subsequent  power  that  accompanied  the  preaching  of  it  on  the 
day  of  Penticost,  and  especially  its  nobler  triumphs  in  these  lat¬ 
ter  days. 

2.  The  curse  of  unfruitfulness  on  the  earth,  compelling  man 
to  eat  bread  in  the  sweat  of  his  face,  and  dooming  him  to  a  life¬ 
time  of  toil,  yet  operating  by  the  very  necessity  for  laborious  oc¬ 
cupation,  to  subdue  his  imperious  will,  and  preserve  him  against 
temptation. 

3.  The  entire  array  and  admixture  of  providential  dealings, 
both  in  the  way  of  judgment  and  mercy, meeting  him  at  every  step 
in  life,  warning  him  against  transgression,  and  pointing  him  ever 
towards  the  path  of  righteousness  as  the  only  safe  and  proper 
one,  and  mingling  in  the  cup  of  his  experience,  happiness  and 
misery,  joy  and  sorrow,  in  just  that  proportion  best  adapted,  on 
the  whole,  to  stir  him  up  to  repentance,  to  break  the  bonds  of  sin, 
and  drive  him  to  Christ  for  pardon. 

4.  Temporal  death,  inherited  from  Adam,  and  yet  also  com¬ 
ing  on  men  as  the  fearful  and  abiding  testimony  of  God  against 
their  own  sin — “  the  animadversion  of  a  righteous  God  upon  it ;  ” 
standing  as  a  grim  spectre  in  the  path  of  every  living  man, grasp¬ 
ing  him  at  last  with  relentless  hand,  and  removing  him  by  a  visi¬ 
ble  process  to  that  other  future  world,  pregnant  to  his  guilty 
conscience  with  a  righteous  retribution  ;  and  all  to  make  him  fear 
sin,  and  seek  (deliverance  from  its  power  as  being  uthe  sting  of 
death ;  ”  and  especially  to  urge  him  to  obtain  that  interest  in  an 
atoning  Savior  which  shall  lead  him  at  last  to  sing  the  song  of 
victory  over  death  and  the  grave. 


66 


5.  And  then  all  this  eontiasted  with  the  bright  world  in 
which  he  lives,  and  in  which  God  “  hath  made  everything  beau¬ 
tiful  in  his  time  ;  ”  and  whose  beauty  sinfulness  only  has  marred; 
filled  with  every  variety  of  divine  manifestation,  and  illustrating, 
in  every  conceivable  aspect,  the  wisdom  of  God  in  the  works  of 
creation,  and  his  wonderful  benevolence  in  the  great  plan  of 
salvation. 

6.  Moral  government  everywhere — in  the  family,  the  state 
and  the  nation ;  designed  to  instruct  the  race  in  the  prime  duty 
of  submission  to  law  and  authority,  that  they  might  thus  learn 
submission  to  God. 

7.  The  Bible — God’s  direct  revelation  to  men  ;  unfolding  to 
them  his  character  for  “  goodness  and  severity,”  as  one  who 
“  forgiveth  iniquity  and  transgression  and  sin,  and  that  will  by  no 
means  clear  the  guilty ;  ”  revealing  his  righteous  law,  enjoining 
upon  them  to  love  God  with  all  their  hearts,  and  their  neighbor 
as  themselves  ;  filled  with  all  encouragements  to  right  living  arid 
acting,  and  all  warnings  and  threatenings  against  an  evil  course, 
and  with  all  needed  instructions  for  the  guidance  of  men,  so  that 
“  the  way-faring  men  though  fools  need  not  err  therein  :  ”  (Is. 
35  :  8.)  And  above  all  pressing  them  with  the  most  powerful  of 
all  motives  to  holiness — the  infinite  love  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Indeed  the  beginning,  middle  and  end  of  the  Bible  is  to  unfold 
the  great  plan  of  mercy  through  a  crucified  Redeemer. 

8.  All  instrumentalities  for  creating  and  deepening  religious 
feeling  and  conviction — prayers,  sacraments,  Sabbaths,  sanctu¬ 
aries,  Christian  intercourse,  and  means  of  grace  generally ;  and 
all  accompanied  and  intensified  in  their  influence  by  the  powerful 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  “  God’s  last,  best  gift  to  man  operat¬ 
ing  upon  his  heart  to  give  efficacy  to  all  these  means  and  motives, 
and  striving,  with  unutterable  earnestness,  to  lead  him  to  re¬ 
pentance  ;  and  used,  as  we  have  every  reason  to  believe,  to  the 
very  last  extent  they  properly  can  be,  to  lead  men  to  accept  of 
pardon  and  life  through  the  atoning  Saviour. 

9.  The  affecting  representation  of  “  all  Heaven  in  a  stir  ” 
about  the  matter  of  human  recovery  ;  “  so  that  there  cannot  a 
single  son  or  a  single  daughter  be  reclaimed  from  sin  to  holiness, 
without  an  acclamation  of  joy  among  the  hosts  of  Paradise;  aye, 
and  it  can  be  said  of  the  humblest  and  unworthiest  of  us  all,  that 
the  eye  of  angels  is  upon  him,  and  that  his  repentance  would,  at 
this  moment,  send  forth  a  wave  of  delighted  sensibility  through¬ 
out  the  mighty  throng  of  their  innumerable  legions.”* 

10.  Finally,  the  Almighty  himself,  in  entire  consistency  with 
all  these  means,  motives  and  instrumentalities  which  he  has  set 
in  operation,  and  which  are  the  evidence  to  the  universe  of  his 


*Chalmers. 


(57 


sincerity,  swearing  by  his  own  Eternal  Self  that  he  is  not  willing 
that  man  should  perish — “  As  I  live  saith  the  Lord  God,  I  have 
no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked ;  but  that  the  wicked  turn 
from  his  way  and  live  ;  turn  ye,  turn  ye  from  your  evil  ways ;  for 
why  will  ye  die?  ”  (Eze.  33  :  11.) 

Viewed  in  this  light,  the  world  may  be  regarded  as  one 
mighty  mass  of  means  and  efforts  for  saving  men — as  a  vast  work¬ 
room ,  filled  with  every  description  of  the  most  powerful  and 
complicated  moral  machinery,  from  the  awful  presence  and 
operation  of  the  Almighty  Spirit,  down  to  the  smallest  providen¬ 
tial  dealing;  and  all  arranged  for  the  one  single  object  of  wrorking 
out  salvation  for  the  sinful ;  and  God  himself  presiding  over  all, 
directing  all,  the  Omnipotent  energy  that  keeps  all  in  motion. 
We  may  thus  regard  him  as  throwing  himself,  with  the  entire 
resources  of  his  infinite  nature,  on  the  side  of  repentance  and 
salvation,  and  day  and  night  urging  on  the  mightiest  instrumen¬ 
talities  of  the  universe,  to  pluck  sinning  men  from  perdition,  “ not 
williug  that  any  should  perish."1 

Here,  we  see  what  a  serious  and  tremendous  matter  is  this 
earthly  probation,  from  the  fact  that  nothing  can  apparently  be 
added  to  it  to  increase  the  likelihood  of  its  success.  Certainly 
there  can  be  no  better  physical  arrangements,  no  different  prin¬ 
ciples  of  moral  government,  no  more  powerful  motives,  and  no 
better  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  so  that  the  Divine  instru¬ 
mentality  in  changing  human  character,  and  leading  sinful  men  to 
love  and  serve  God,  through  means,  motives  and  influences  of 
various  kinds,  is  manifestly  exerted  to  the  full  extent  in  this  world 
that  it  wisely  and  properly  can  be.  This  point  will  be  more  fully 
considered  when  we  come  to  notice  the  scheme  of  the  Restora- 
tionists. 

Whatever  objections,  therefore,  any  one  may  make  to  the 
present  arrangements  of  this  world,  even  in  view  of  all  the  misery 
and  wretchedness  which  sin  has  here  occasioned,  he  is  not  com¬ 
petent  to  assert  that  the  human  race  could  have  been  placed  in 
circumstances  involving  any  less  of  guilt,  any  less  of  suffering,  a 
more  hopeful  probation,  or  the  final  salvation  of  one  more  individ¬ 
ual.  Even  more,  upon  the  assumed  benevolence  of  God,  and 
his  unequivocal  declaration  of  his  unwillingness  that  any  should 
perish,  as  well  as  the  manifest  conditions  of  human  probation,  we 
are  bound  to  believe  that  every  arrangement  of  this  world  is  in 
the  interest  of  salvation ;  that  everything  is  done  that  can  be,  to 
pluck  sinning  men  from  perdition  ;  and  even  to  that  extent  that 
the  economy  of  Divine  Providence  has  been  completely  exhausted 
in  this  direction  ;  so  that  God  may  now  truthfully  say,  in  view  of 
all  he  has  done  to  save  men,  “What  could  have  been  done  more 
to  my  vineyard  that  I  have  not  done  in  it.  (Is.  5  :  4.) 


CHAPTER  V. 


THE  UNFALLEN  ANGELS. 

The  assumption  usually  is  that  they  were  created  at  the  same 
time  with  the  Fallen  Angels,  and  that  both  existed  together  for 
a  time  in  holiness  and  happiness.  But  this  idea  is  purely  Milto¬ 
nian,  and  has  no  foundation  in  the  Scriptures.  The  Fallen  Angel 
only  is  mentioned  in  the  beginning.  Moreover,  the  supposition 
that  both  were  created  at  the  same  time,  starts  troublesome  ques¬ 
tions.  If  a  part  sinned,  why  not  all  ?  If  God  could  keep  a  part 
from,  sinning,  why  not  ail?  And  to  these  questions,  human  reason 
gives  not  even  a  conjectural  answer. 

When  they  were  created,  we  know  not.  No  mention  is  made 
of  them  till  the  time  of  Abraham.  All  possible  periods  have  been 
assigned  to  their  creation — “before  the  visible  world;”  “  on  the 
first  of  the  six  days  ;  ”  “  on  the  fourth,  day  ;  ”  and  “  after  man.” 
This  latter  view  was  held  by  Gennadius  in  the  fifth  century,  and 
by  Schubert  of  Helmstadt  in  modern  times.  [Knapp’s  Theology.] 
We  may  locate  them,  therefore,  anywhere  before  the  time  of  Abra¬ 
ham,  where  they  will  best  harmonize  with  the  general  system.* 
In  the  absence  of  all  opposing  evidence,  and  following  the  Bibli¬ 
cal  order ,  we  prefer  to  consider  them  the  third  order  of  created 
intelligence. 

Assuming  this,  and  the  following  considerations  will  suffi¬ 
ciently  explain  the  fact  of  their  preservance  in  holiness. 

1.  They  have  seen  the  firmness  of  God  in  the  punishment  of 
the  sinning  angels,  making  the  highest  possible  appeal  to  fear , 
and  operating  powerfully  to  deter  them  from  transgression. 

2.  They  are  brought  into  fierce  and  persistent  conflict  with 
these  same  wicked  spirits — the  Powers  of  Evil. 


*  It  seems  desirable  to  locate  them,  if  possible,  so  that  there  shall  ap¬ 
pear  to  be,  from  their  position,  some  reason  or  explanation  why  they 
maintained  their  allegiance,  while  the  others  rebelled.  In  the  view  here 
presented,  the  effort  lias  been  to  find  the  explanation  in  the  appeal  to  fear 
in  the  punishment  of  the  Fallen  Angels,  and  to  affection  in  the  work  of 
Redemption. 

Now,  if  any  one  chooses  to  place  their  creation  before  that  of  Adam, 
or  can  put  it  at  any  other  time,  where  they  shall  appear  to  come  under 
the  influence  of  these  or  other  motives  in  some  more  natural  or  effective 
manner,  then  such  a  place  or  period  for  their  creation,  will,  on  that  ac¬ 
count,  seem  preferable  to  the  one  herein  advocated. 


69 


The  angel  commissioned  to  attend  upon  the  prophet  Daniel, 
and  “  minister  ”  to  him,  is  represented  as  being  hindered  by  a 
severe  contest  with  a  powerful  and  wicked  agency — some  malig¬ 
nant  spirit  who  was  thwarting  and  hindering  him. 

In  the  vision  of  Zechariah,  he  saw  “  Joshua  the  high  priest 
standing  before  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Satan  standing  at  his 
right  hand  to  resist  him.” 

In  Lev.  12:7,  the  declaration  is,  u  There  was  war  in  heaven  ; 
Michael  and  his  angels  fought  against  the  dragon  ;  and  the  dra¬ 
gon  fought  and  his  angels.” 

And  so  everywhere  in  the  world,  where  the  angels  of  heaven 
find  their  appropriate  employment  in  ministering  to  God’s  chil¬ 
dren,  and  promoting  the  interests  of  his  kingdom,  they  are  very 
likely  brought  into  the  fiercest  antagonism  with  the  Devil  and 
his  angels  and  every  advantage  gained,  is  at  the  cost  of  a  strug¬ 
gle,  and  every  success  is  a  victorious  triumph  over  their  malig¬ 
nant  opposers ;  so  that  they,  as  wrell  as  we,  are  “  wrestling 
against  Principalities,  against  Powers,  against  the  Eulers  of  the 
darkness  of  this  world,  against  spiritual  wickedness  in  high 
places.”  (Eph.  6:12.) 

It  is  evident  that  the  entire  influence  of  such  a  conflict  must 
be  to  enlist  their  sympathies  on  the  side  of  God  ;  to  lead  them  to 
hate  the  character  and  conduct  of  their  opposers ;  to  awaken  af¬ 
fection  for  the  cause  of  truth  and  righteousness  for  which  they 
contend ;  and  thus  to  fortify  their  position  in  right,  by  the  most 
powerful  defences  of  holy  character. 

3.  They  are  also  deterred  from  sinning  by  the  punishment 
of  the  ungodly  of  this  world.  The  declaration  in  Eevelation  14  : 
10  is  that  the  sinners  there  spoken  of  should  be  “  tormented  in 
the  presence  of  the  holy  angels.”  Why  should  they  be  compelled 
to  witness  so  dreadful  a  sight  if  it  were  not  necessary ?  Why  nec¬ 
essary  but  for  its  moral  effect  upon  them  ?  What  moral  effect 
can  be  imagined  as  necessary  but  to  keep  them  from  apostasy  f 

4.  They  have  witnessed  the  mercy  of  God  in  the  work  of 

Eedemption.  They  behold  him  stooping  in  tenderness  and  pity 
to  the  lost,  and  giving  his  only  begotten  Son  to  death  for  their 
salvation,  furnishing  thus  the  highest  possible  appeal  to  affec¬ 
tion;  and  they  cannot  contemplate  it  without  being  drawn  to  him 
in  wonder,  admiration  and  love,  and  having  an  ardent  desire  also, 
to  explore  the  mysteries  of  this  wonderful  plan. — “  Which  things 
the  angels  desire  to  look  into .”  (1  Pet.  1:12.) 

5.  Added  to  this,  and  as  tending  in  a  special  manner  to 
draw'  them  into  sympathy  with  God,  are  their  own  personal  min¬ 
istrations  to  the  redeemed.  “  Are  they  not  all  ministering  spirits 
sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation.” 


70 


(Iieb.  1:14.)  This  is  pre-eminently  their  delightful  employment 
— bestowing  their  affectionate  attentions  upon  those  redeemed 
ones  whom  the  Savior  has  loved  with  an  everlasting  love,  and 
whose  “  names  are  written  in  the  book  of  life  from  the  founda¬ 
tion  of  the  world.”  (Rev.  17:8.) 

6.  In  respect  to  the  work  of  Redemption  also,  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  clearly  indicate  that  the  angelic  hosts  have  in  it  a  personal 
interest. 

They  “desire  to  look  into  it,”  as  if  bending  over  it  in  wonder 
and  admiration,  and  with  an  anxiety  to  fathom  its  profound  mys¬ 
teries.  They  were  present  at  the  birth  of  Christ,  and  their  exult¬ 
ant  song  was  heard  by  the  shepherds  on  the  plains  of  Bethlehem 
“  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  on  earth  peace,  good  will  to  men.” 
(Luke  2:  14.)  They  ministered  to  the  tried  and  tempted  Savior 
in  the  wilderness.  In  the  agony  of  the  Garden,  he  was  strength¬ 
ened  by  the  ministering  angel.  They  were  present  at  his  Res¬ 
urrection  and  rolled  away  the  stone  from  the  door  of  the  Sepul¬ 
chre,  and  are  ever  engaged  in  loving  ministrations  to  redeemed 
saints  during  their  earthly  pilgrimage.  And  when  the  earthly 
warfare  is  ended  for  them,  and  the  poor  afflicted  Sons  of  God  have 
been  sufficiently  disciplined  and  purified,  then,  as  they  bore  the 
suffering  Lazarus  to  Abraham’s  bosom,  they  doubtless  bear  their 
departing  spirits  home  to  the  mansions  of  glory — “  The  beggar 
died,  and  was  carried  by  the  angels  into  Abraham’s  bosom.”  (Luke 
16:  22,) 

This  absorbing  interest  in  the  entire  plan  of  salvation,  and 
especially  their  loving  ministrations  to  redeemed  saints,  awaken 
the  strongest  conviction  that  they  owe  their  confirmation  in  holi¬ 
ness  to  the  influence  of  redeeming  love  and  mercy — that  infinite 
love  which  has  been  poured  out  without  stint  or  measuie  upon 
this  lost  world  in  the  life,  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ  for 
human  redemption  and  salvation. 

7.  Another  thoughtis  suggested.  The  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  make  motives  efficacious,  and  which  are  an  important 
element  in  the  general  plan  of  the  Atonement,  and  form  a  part  of 
it,  being  given  as  the  Apostle  expressly  states,  “through  Christ 
Jesus,”  may  possibly  be  used,  to  a  certain  extent,  in  confirming 
them  in  holiness.  While  these  peculiar  influences  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  would  find,  very  likely,  no  appropriate  place  under  a  system 
of  mere  law ,  and  could  not  therefore,  have  been  used  with  the 
fallen  angels,  yet,  now  that  the  majesty  of  God’s  administration  is 
fully  sustained  by  the  infinite  provisions  of  Redemption,  no  reason 
appears  why,  under  it,  the  whole  machinery  of  a  gracious  dispen- 


71 


sation  may  not  appropriately  be  used,  to  a  certain  extent  at  least, 
in  confirming  the  angels  in  obedience.* 

The  probability,  therefore,  is  that  the  unfallen  angels  are 
being  educated  for  God’s  eternal  service ;  and  by  active  sympathy 
and  co-operation  with  him  in  the  plan  of  salvation — with  whose 
grand  design,  just  mentioned,  they  may  have  been  made  fully  ac¬ 
quainted — are  being  steadily  lifted  to  that  consolidation  of  char¬ 
acter  on  the  side  of  God  and  holiness,  which  shall  finally  confirm 
them,  if  it  has  not  already,  in  eternal  obedience. 

If  they  are  not  already  confirmed,  then  their  position  is  doubt¬ 
less  analagous  to  that  of  Adam  in  the  garden  previous  to  his  fall, 
and  like  him  they  are  studying  the  works  and  wonders  of  the  Al¬ 
mighty  as  exhibited  on  the  entire  field  of  his  moral  and  provi¬ 
dential  government. 

But  in  addition  to  this,  the  angels  are  now  employed  in  study¬ 
ing  and  “looking  into”  the  great  scheme  of  Redemption,  and  ad¬ 
miring  its  glories;  and  if  such  employments  for  thousands  of 
years,  will  finally  result  in  their  confirmation  in  holiness,  and  are 
necessary  to  it,  then  will  they  be  thus  employed  for  thousands  of 
years  ;  for  “  on  the  high  scale  of  eternity,”  they  would  all  be  but 
a  day ;  and  so  glorious  a  consummation  would  well  compensate 
for  the  study  and  employment  of  ages. 

But  if  they  are  already  established  in  holiness,  then  it  ap- 


*  Let  this  thought  be  extended  in  this  connection.  It  is  very  possible 
that  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  may  be  used  in  securing  the  obedi¬ 
ence  of  all  worlds  forever.  Not  perhaps  without  limitation  ;  for,  to  bring 
into  moral  government  an  extraneous  influence  to  supplement  authority, 
and  so  induce  obedience,  is  everywhere  a  dangerous  expedient,  and  to  be 
used  always  with  great  caution  ;  which  is,  very  likely,  the  reason  why  no 
more  are  saved  in  this  world — these  influences  being  used  to  the  full  extent 
they  safely  can  be.  And  now,  to  how  great  an  extent  God  may  properly 
make  use  of  these  influences  in  securing  the  obedience  of  newly-created 
minds  in  other  worlds,  and  in  all  ages,  we  know  not  ;  but  possibly  to  a 
certain  extent ;  and  his  plan  may  be,  to  bring  each  world,  as  it  is  peopled, 
under  a  gracious  dispensation,  as  the  only  possible  way  to  save  it  from 
apostasy.  In  this  view,  every  peopled  world  is  to  pass  through  an  exper¬ 
iment  of  probation,  that  will  need  all  the  moral  influences  drawn  from 
Heaven,  Hell  and  Cavalry,  to  bring  it  up  to  the  requisite  point  of  self- 
denial  and  submission  to  God. 

At  this  point  we  obtain  a  more  comprehensive  view  of  the  original 
design  and  plan  of  the  system  of  Grace  than  is  usually  presented.  In  the 
view  we  are  taking,  it  is  evidently  aimed  at  securing  this  two  fold  result. 

1.  The  remission  of  appropriate  and  necessary  penalty,  and  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  for  the  salvation  of  sinful  men ,  without  impairing  the 
perfection  of  government ;  and 

2.  Introducing  into  the  moral  system  of  the  universe  the  influence  and 
energy  of  the  sanctifying  Spirit  without  impairing  the  perfection  of  gov¬ 
ernment,  and  without  whose  influences  not  a  world,  nor  even  an  individ¬ 
ual  could  be  rescued  from  confirmed  and  hopeless  apostasy. 

In  this  view  the  “  ministration  of  the  Spirit”  become  “glorious”  indeed. 


72 


pears  to  be  already  possible  to  confirm  intelligent  beings  in  obe¬ 
dience  to  God  ;  and  the  question  arises — Why,  in  the  view  we 
are  taking,  should  the  experiment  with  this  wicked  world  be  any 
longer  continued  ? 

The  following  is  suggested. — The  plan  of  Bedemption  thus 
far  has  been  carried  on  under  the  personal  inspection  of  angelic 
beings  ;  and  this  personal  observation  has  been  to  the  last  degree 
efficacious  in  drawing  them  in  affectionate  submission  to  the  Al¬ 
mighty.  But  to  the  newly  created  beings  of  future  ages  and  of 
other  worlds,  this  personal  inspection  of  God’s  merciful  dealings 
with  sinful  men,  will  be  impossible ;  and  the  glories  and  wonders 
of  Bedemption,  which  have  beamed  with  such  dazzling  splendor 
on  the  gaze  of  the  Archangel,  and  have  stirred  all  the  depths  of 
his  being  with  their  immediate  power,  can  only  reach  other  and 
future  worlds  as  a  matter  of  history.  They  can  never  see  the 
agony  in  the  garden, nor  the  death  upon  the  cross;  and  these  can 
never  become  influential,  in  the  same  way  with  them  as  with  the 
angels.  And  so,  as  we  suppose,  the  world  must  yet  move  on,  and 
motives  multiply  from  God’s  dealings  with  the  successive  genera¬ 
tions  of  men,  until  a  historic  efficacy  of  motive  shall  have  been 
reached  sufficient  for  the  necessities  of  the  future  universe  ;  and 
not  till  then  will  come  the  signal  for  the  winding  up  of  human 
affairs. 

Thus  far  we  have  considered  the  past  universe  mainly  in  its 
historic  aspect — the  general  history  of  the  three  orders  of  beings 
who  are  assumed  to  be  the  only  ones  at  present  created.  In  the 
foregoing  presentation,  the  reader  will  clearly  see  that  it  is  not 
the  design  of  the  writer  to  discuss  theological  doctrines  much 
beyond  what  may  be  necessary  to  develop  his  own  peculiar  views 
and  their  consistency  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  ;  and  also 
and  especially  to  show  the  value  of  those  views  in  removing  objec¬ 
tions  to  the  Evangelical  system. 


PART  SECOND. 


THE  FUTURE  UNIVERSE. 

INTRODUCTION. 

We  are  facing  a  future  and  endless  universe.  We  have  but 
just  entered  on  existence — infants  of  a  day;  and  what  the  future 
of  that  universe  will  be — what  shall  be  the  outcome  of  its  endless 
progress,  what  difficulties  may  environ  it,  what  exigencies  it  may 
encounter,  and  especially  what  may  be,  or  what  may  not  be,  neces¬ 
sary  to  lay  the  foundations  of  that  government  with  eternal  sta¬ 
bility,  we  know  not,  except  so  far  as  they  have  been  revealed  to  us 
in  the  word  of  God.  One  thing  is  certain :  A  vast  future  is  mov¬ 
ing  on  to  meet  us  with  its  untried  scenes,  and  there  is  no  escaping 
it ;  and  what  these  endless  ages  shall  contain  for  us,  and  what 
scenes  we  shall  encounter  when  we  have  left  the  world,  should 
be,  with  us,  a  matter  of  intense  and  solemn  interest. 

The  following  argument  is  commended  to  the  religious  and 
irreligious  alike,  aiming  as  it  does  to  show  that  human  probation 
is  a  matter  of  serious  and  tremendous  import ;  seeing  that  we 
each  one  of  us  are  sustaining  vital  and  fundamental  relations  to 
the  whole  vast  universe  of  God,  and  to  the  progressive  welfare  of 
the  endless  future  which  is  before  us. 

It  was  conclusively  shown  in  Part  I,  that,  to  all  appearance, 
God  is  just  now  laying  the  foundations  of  the  endless  moral  uni¬ 
verse  that  is  to  be.  If  so,  then  this  world  is  only  the  stepping- 
stone,  as  it  were,  of  the  future.  Then  the  entire  providential  gov¬ 
ernment  of  God  in  this  world  is  sweeping  directly  onwrard  to  this 
endless  future,  and  finds  its  prime  significance  in  its  relations  to 
it.  Even  all  of  God’s  dealings  with  our  race  thus  far,  all  that  is 
now  in  progress  in  the  world,  and  all  that  will  enter  into  its  ex¬ 
perience  in  the  coming  years,  even  till  the  winding  up  of  its  his¬ 
tory  at  the  Judgment,  all  have  prime  reference  to  the  mightier 
interests  and  welfare  of  the  coming  ages  and  races  of  the  uni¬ 
verse. 

Especially  in  the  future  are  to  be  found,  it  is  believed,  the 
grander  triumphs  of  Redemption.  To  this  Redemption  through 
Christ  Jesus,  all  the  past  ages  have  only  been  introductory  ;  so 
that  the  foundations  of  the  whole  great  universe  of  God  were 


74 


only  laid  that  he  might  be  glorified.  “  All  things  were  created 
for  him.”  (Col.  1:16.)  Also,  in  this  view,  all  that  has  been  ac¬ 
complished  by  the  work  of  Redemption  thus  far,  is  only  the  be¬ 
ginning  of  its  endless  and  increasing  glories.  In  other  worlds, 
doubtless,  and  amid  other  scenes,  and  other  races  of  moral  beings, 
is  to  be  found  the  culmination  of  its  great  design.  Hardly  though 
its  culmination ,  for  in  this  view  it  is  to  have  none,  but  go  on  in  a 
career  of  increasing  glory  and  blessedness  forevermore.  It  is  uin 
the  ages  to  come,”  that  he  will  “  show  the*exceeding  riches  of  his 
grace.”  (Eph.  2:7.) 

The  main  point  to  be  considered  in  the  remainder  of  this 
work  is,  that  God’s  dealings  with  the  sinners  of  this  world,  both 
in  the  way  of  judgment  and  mercy,  are  developing  those  peculiar 
motives  and  influences  which  are  to  steady,  control  and  save  the 
future  universe  in  its  endless  career. 


i 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE  EXTENT,  DURATION,  AND  ENLARGEMENT  OF  THE  FUTURE  UNIVERSE. 


The  trouble  men  have  with  the  sterner  doctrines  of  the  Bible 
and  the  objections  they  make  to  them  are,  in  a  great  measure, 
owing  to  the  fact  that  all  their  other  conceptions  of  God,  and  his 
government,  and  the  interests  to  be  protected  by  it,  are  so  inade¬ 
quate  and  defective.  Their  thought  is  confined  almost  solely  to 
this  world  and  the  comparatively  few  beings  who  people  it ;  to  a 
government  having  a  limited  and  inferior  range  ;  to  interests  of 
mere  finite  value ;  to  a  law  of  only  ordinary  sacredness ;  and  even 
the  conception  of  God  himself — the  great  Lawgiver  and  moral 
Governor  of  the  universe,  and  the  responsible  Guardian  of  its 
welfare — is  only  that  of  a  fond  and  doting  parent,  destitute  of 
firmness,  compounded  of  weakness  and  pusillanimity,  and  with¬ 
out  sufficient  authority,  dignity,  and  self-respect  to  govern  the 
smallest  State  of  the  Union. 

And  men  allow  this  childish  conception  of  the  Almighty  in 
spite  of  human  woes — in  spite  of  the  earthquake  and  the  pesti¬ 
lence  and  fire  and  storms  and  whirlwinds  and  death, and  the  clear 
and  corresponding  declaration  of  the  Bible  that  “  God  is  a  con¬ 
suming  fire”  and  “will  not  at  all  acquit  the  wicked.” 

To  the  mind  of  such  a  one  the  doctrine  of  endless  punish¬ 
ment  for  sin  is  necessarily  absurd.  With  such  defective  views  of 
truth  generally,  this  doctrine  cannot  harmonize  ;  and  like  a  giant 
among  pigmies,  finds  no  correspondence  with  its  insignificant 
surroundings. 

Evidently,  therefore,  before  the  conceptions  of  such  a  mind 
can  be  made  self-consistent,  one  of  the  two  things  must  be  done 
— either  lower  the  penalty  of  the  Divine  Law  to  accommodate 
these  inferior  and  untruthful  conceptions,  or  else  elevate  the  con¬ 
ceptions  of  God  and  his  government  to  their  proper  magnitude. 
The  mass  of  men,  and  even  multitudes  of  our  church  members, 
are  attempting  the  former.  This  book  adopts  the  other  alterna¬ 
tive,  and  endeavors  so  to  exalt  our  conceptions  of  God  and  his 
government  that  all  the  great  pillars  of  his  universe — Law  aud 
Penalty,  Reward  and  Pardon,  like  the  columns  of  some  grand  and 
harmonious  temple,  shall  be  seen  towering  together  into  the  in¬ 
finite  in  their  majestic  proportions. 


76 


What  then  is  the  universe  that  God  is  building  ? 

First.  We  consider  its  vastness.  It  is  not  bounded  by  this 
world.  It  extends  beyond  this  comparatively  diminutive  planet 
to  myriads  of  other  worlds.  It  embraces  the  countless  systems 
which  only  the  telescope  reveals — even  an  infinitude  of  worlds  and 
suns  and  systems,  to  which  no  power  either  of  the  eye  or  of  the 
telescope  has  yet  carried  us.  True,  they  may  not  yet  be  peopled, 
they  may  not  be  ready  as  yet  for  the  occupancy  of  moral  beings, 
but  they  are  all  doubtless  to  be  peopled  with  free  moral  intelli¬ 
gences,  amenable  to  the  same  laws  with  ourselves,  comprehended 
in  the  same  administration,  and  constituting  together  one  grand 
empire. 

Second.  But  this  is  not  enough.  We  are  to  think  of  it  also 
as  an  endless  universe.  We  have  no  evidence  that  a  particle  of 
matter  has  ever  been  annihilated,  or  ever  will  be.  We  have  no 
evidence  that  a  single  mind  once  created  will  ever  cease  to  exist. 
We  can,  therefore,  affix  no  limit  to  the  duration  of  the  universe, 
and  it  appears  to  be  stretching  on  and  on  to  eternal  ages.  To  all 
appearance,  God  is  building  an  endless  universe. 

Third.  And  this  is  not  enough.  We  see  the  mass  of  mind 
continually  expanding  and  enlarging — millions  of  new  minds 
coming  yearly  into  existence,  and  each  and  all  immortal.  Hence 
the  fundamental  law  of  the  universe  appears  to  be  one  of  ceaseless 
and  endless  expansion.  Moreover,  we  see  no  reason  why  the  same 
Power  which  has  laid  the  foundations  of  so  vast  an  empire,  and 
proceeded  thus  far  with  its  development,  should  not  advance  still 
farther,  and  find  hereafter  the  same  reason  for  exertion  which  it 
has  thus  far  found  ;  nor  why,  indeed,  its  exertion  should  ever 
cease;  why  God,  who  has  begun  to  create,  should  ever  cease  creat¬ 
ing.  Space  and  duration  are  both  apparently  limitless,  and  there¬ 
fore,  no  reason  appears  why  omnipotent  energy  should  ever  di¬ 
minish  its  activity.  And  should  it  not,  then  will  the  time  come 
when  the  mass  of  beings  now  in  existence  will  be  but  the  “  small 
dust  of  the  balance,”  compared  with  its  magnitude  in  the  coming 
ages.  And  so  at  this  point  we  face  not  only  an  eternal,  but  an 
eternally  expanding ,  universe  of  moral  beings — endless  in  dura¬ 
tion  ;  boundless  in  enlargment. 

And  here  the  mind  pauses  a  moment  to  consider  what  stu¬ 
pendous  foundations  of  government  must  be  laid  adequately  to 
sustain  such  a  superstructure.  And  the  thought  arises  also — IIow 
grandly  and  truthfully  this  mighty  moral  system  harmonizes  with 
the  declaration  of  the  Almighty:  “  As  the  heavens  are  higher 
than  the  earth,  so  are  my  ways  higher  than  your  ways,  and  my 
thoughts  than  your  thoughts.”  (Is.  55:9.)  And  now,  if  any  of 
God’s  “  ways,”  as  we  are  about  to  consider  them,  should  appear 


77 


too  high  and  dizzy  and  dreadful  for  our  finite  gaze;  especially  if 
the  foundations  of  law  and  penalty  should  appear  unnecessarily 
massive — should  appear  even  to  be  infinite  foundations,  the  solu¬ 
tion  of  the  matter  may  be  found  in  this — that  God  is  building  so 
vast  a  universe,  and  laying  the  foundations  of  a  government  over 
it  that  must  stand  the  strain  of  eternity. 


CHAPTER  II. 


SIN  IN  ITS  RELATIONS  TO  GOD’S  MORAL  GOVERNMENT,  AND  TO  THE 

FUTURE  AND  ENDLESS  UNIVERSE. 

Sec.  1.  The  liability ,  tendency  and  temptation  to  sin  endless. 

It  was  stated  in  connection  with  the  sin  of  the  Fallen  Angels, 
that  the  occasion  of  sin  was  to  be  found  in  the  necessary  nature  of 
free-agency  under  the  necessary  restraint  of  law,  and  belonged  to 
the  nature  of  every  moral  being  who  either  has  been  or  can  be 
created;  and,  therefore,  that  in  all  moral  beings  forever,  at  the 
commencement  of  their  existence,  and  until  each  one  has  passed 
the  trial  of  probation,  and  become  confirmed  in  obedience  to  God, 
there  will  be  the  same  liability,  temptation  and  tendency  to  re¬ 
bellion  which  has  already  broken  out  in  the  sinning  angels  and 
men;  and,  therefore,  that  here  was  an  endless  difficulty  to  be  end¬ 
lessly  met  and  surmounted  by  the  Almighty. 

OBJECTIONS. 

To  this  it  may  be  objected. 

1.  That,  if  this  dislike  of  restraint  be  a  necessary  element 
in  the  nature  of  a  moral  being,  then  its  indulgence  is  a  matter  of 
course,  and  not  to  be  wondered  at;  and  that  a  moral  being  cannot 
be  blamed  for  indulging  it.  Answer. 

This  objection  overlooks  the  essential  elements  of  a  free 
nature,  for  while  it  is  true  that  the  love  of  conscious  freedom, 
and  the  consequent  dislike  of  restraint  belong  necessarily  to 
the  nature  of  a  free  moral  agent,  yet  so  also  do  reason  and  con¬ 
science  and  the  sense  of  moral  obligation  belong  as  truly  and 
inseparably  to  such  a  nature;  and  the  free  moral  agent  is  as  free 
to  follow  the  one  as  the  other.  Moreover,  the  stronger  motive, 
as  estimated  by  its  nature — by  its  appeal  to  his  own  highest 
good,  and  the  highest  good  of  all  in  any  way  affected  by 
his  conduct — is  always  on  the  side  of  reason  and  conscience, 
of  God  and  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  so  that  the  man,  under  all  possible 
circumstances,  feels  under  obligation  to  follow  them  and  do  as 
his  Maker  commands  him,  cost  what  it  may  in  the  way  of  sacri¬ 
fice  and  self-denial.  The  absence  of  this  freedom  of  choice  would 


79 


reduce  him  to  the  level  of  the  brute  creation,  who  act  necessarily 
in  carrying  out  their  desires,  knowing  no  other  way  of  acting  but 
in  the  direction  of  the  strongest  inclination,  and  who  are  there¬ 
fore  destitute  of  moral  character,  and  are  ignorant  of  their  rela¬ 
tions  to  God.  A  moral  being  is  not  thus  constituted.  He  knows 
God  as  his  Creator,  Preserver,  and  rightful  Governor,  and  under¬ 
stands  the  claims  of  duty  and  moral  obligation,  and  knows  and 
feels  that  he  is  ever  bound  to  be  governed  by  them.  Indeed  they 
ever  stand  regnant  in  the  soul’s  empire,  and  their  dictates  can 
never  be  disregarded  without  incurring  corresponding  guilt  and 
desert  of  punishment. 

Although,  therefore,  this  inclination  to  independence-this  be¬ 
ing  “  drawn  away  of  one’s  own  lust,”  as  the  apostle  terms  it — this 
occasion  of  sin,  belongs  to  the  necessary  nature  of  free  agency, 
yet,  as  reason  and  conscience  belong  also  to  the  necessary  nature 
of  free-agency,  and  the  moral  being  is  and  must  be  eternally 
bound  by  them,  so  for  him  to  yield  to  this  impulse  of  self-indul¬ 
gence  in  opposition  to  the  claims  of  duty,  is,  and  must  ever  be,  in¬ 
excusably  sinful. 

For,  when  rightful  authority  meets  a  moral  being  in  any 
form  to  which  he  feels  disinclined  to  yield,  reason  and  conscience 
press  him  at  once  to  resist  this  love  of  independence,  this  temp¬ 
tation,  this  “  drawing  away  of  his  own  lust,”  and  submit  to  the 
requirement.  And  if  he  would  but  resist  it,  as  he  might  do,  and 
as  God  commands  him  to  do — as  the  devil  might  have  done,  and 
Adam  might  have  done,  and  both  should  have  done — not  only 
would  there  be  no  sin  in  him,  but  he  would  merit  the  commenda¬ 
tion,  “  Blessed  is  the  man  that  endureth  temptation.”  But  if  he 
yields  to  it,  he  sins,  and  assumes  the  entire  responsibility  of  the 
wrong-doing.  He  is  never  any  more  excusable  in  yielding  to  this 
occasion  than  is  the  glutton  in  his  gluttony.  Who  would  excuse 
a  man  for  acting  like  a  beast  ? 

True,  he  loves  to  follow  his  inclination,  and  does  follow  it, 
and  sins;  but  were  there  any  thing  in  the  impulse  excuses  him  in 
following  it,  there  would  be  no  explanation  of  that  remorse  which 
rends  the  guilty  soul. 

Remorse  is  the  soul  upbraiding  itself  for  its  sin;  and  where- 
ever  felt,  is  its  own  clear  testimony  to  three  things: 

1.  That  the  sin  committed  was  wholly  unnecessary.  Could 
a  convicted  soul,  in  the  extremity  of  its  torment  from  remorse, 
be  made  to  see  and  feel #  that  back  of  its  wickedness  there  lay  a 
necessity  under  which  it  acted,  the  remorse  would  cease  at  once. 
It  would  instantly  clear  itself  from  blame  and  from  mental  suffer- 
ingjby  the  reflection,  “  I  could  not  help  it,”  and  be  at  peace. 
There  would  no  longer  be  ground  for  remorse  or  the  possibility 
of  it.  There  might  be  any  amount  of  regret  at  the  unpleasant 
consequences  which  have  followed,  but  there  could  be  no  self-re- 


80 


proach  at  being  the  guilty  author  of  those  consequences;  and  this 
is  the  essential  ingredient  in  remorse. 

O  #  m 

2.  Remorse  is  the  soul’s  testimony  that  the  sinful  conduct 
was  inexcusable.  If  in  certain  complicated  cases  of  human  action 
there  are  some  things  which  appear  inexcusable  and  others  not, 
the  remorse  reaches  only  those  which  are  seen  to  be  inexcusable , 
and  keeps  exact  pace  with  the  inexcusableness.  Whatever  is  seen 
to  be  excusable  ceases  to  distress.  Self-reproach  extends  only  to 
that  for  which  the  soul  can  find  710  good  excuse. 

3.  The  testimony  of  the  soul  under  remorse  is,  that  in  the 
precise  circumstances  in  which  it  acted  wrong  it  should  have  acted 
exactly  the  other  way — either  not  to  do  what  it  did  or  to  do  that 
which  it  neglected  to  do.  Observe,  the  conviction  of  the  remorse¬ 
ful  soul  is  that  there  should  have  been  an  entire  change  in  the 
conduct,  with  no  change  in  the  circumstances.  It  blames  itself 
for  acting  as  it  did,  the  circumstances  remaining  as  they  were / 
thus  giving  its  own  highest  testimony  to  its  own  perfect  freedom. 

However  wicked  men  may  reason  against  their  own  freedom 
and  responsibility,  one  pang  of  remorse  within  them  gives  the  lie 
to  all  their  assumptions  against  it,  dissipates  all  their  sophistries, 
and  arraigns  them  at  the  bar  of  their  own  consciences  as  being 
guilty  and  deserving  of  punishment  for  acting  just  as  they  did, 
and  with  no  change  of  circumstances.  And  this  is  freedom — 
freedom  in  choice ,  power  of  contrary  choice — freedom  of  will, 
absolute  and  unqualified. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  as  has  been  said,  no  good  reason 
for  sin  can  exist,  for  then  it  would  not  be  sin,  and  poor  ones  are 
worthless;  and  even  the  occasion  of  sin,  which  has  been  stated 
as  belonging  to  free  agency,  is  yet  one  that  should  ever  be  kept 
in  subordination  to  the  higher  law  of  reason  and  conscience — 
that  law  which  demands  that  God  be  obeyed  at  any  cost  of  sacri¬ 
fice  and  self-denial. 

And  the  example  of  the  Savior,  who  was  “made  in  all 
things  ”  like  as  we  are,  and  “  tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we 
are,”  has  demonstrated  that  it  can  be  and  ought  to  be  kept  in 
subordination.  He  said  “  not  my  will  but  thine  be  done.”  And 
so  ought  every  moral  being  in  God’s  universe  to  say  when 
brought  to  the  trial — “not  my  will  but  thine  be  done;”  and  there 
is  no  manner  of  excuse  why  he  should  not.  Because  he  can  give 
up  his  own  will  and  way;  he  can  go  against  his  inclinations,  and 
ought  ever  to  do  thus  when  reason  and  conscious  demand  it,  even 
as  did  the  Savior;  but  it  will  ever  be  with  a  struggle  at  the  out¬ 
set.  “Not  my  will”  is  the  straight  gate  through  which  every 
soul  must  pass  at  the  threshold  of  moral  action,  and  he  who  said 
it,  “  left  us  an  example,”  and  left  it  to  the  universe  too — “that 


81 


ye  should  follow  his  steps  who  did  no  sin”*  (1  Pet.  1:  21,  22.) 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  every  sin  in  God's  universe  whenever 
or  wherever,  or  by  whomsoever  committed,  is,  and  must  be,  in  the 
very  nature  of  the  case,  wholly  inexcusable,  and  deserving  of  un¬ 
qualified  condemnation.  For  he  who  does  wrong,  and  rejects 
the  binding  authority  of  reason  and  conscience,  commits  an  act, 
second  only  in  criminality,  both  as  respects  its  nature  and  influ¬ 
ence,  to  a  departure  from  moral  rectitude  on  the  part  of  God 
himself.  And  well  may  God  say  to  him,  “  Be  ye  therefore  per¬ 
fect  even  as  your  Father  which  is  in  Heaven  is  perfect.”  “  Be 
ye  holy  for  I  am  holy.”  It  is  objected: 

2.  That  Adam  in  the  garden  obeyed  God  for  some  consid¬ 
erable  time  after  his  creation,  and,  therefore,  could  not  have  had 


*  The  assumption  not  unfrequently  made,  that  Christ  resisted  temp¬ 
tation  and  remained  holy  by  virtue  of  his  Divine  Nature;  or  because  he 
received  extra  divine  assistance  over  and  above  what  we  receive,  is  an 
assunrption  wholly  unauthorized. 

1.  The  Scriptures  nowhere  teach  such  a  doctrine.  The  ministration 
of  the  angels,  on  the  occasion  of  his  temptation  in  the  wilderness  did  not 
occur  till  the  temptation  was  ended;  and  the  “heirs  of  salvation”  are 
favored  with  this  same  supernatural  assistance. 

2.  The  record  of  this  temptation  shows  him  resisting  the  assaults  of 
the  adversary  simply  by  opposing  to  his  suggestions  the  declarations  of 
the  Scriptures;  in  which  there  is  no  evidence  of  superior  divine  assistance. 

3.  The  clear  statement  of  the  Bible,  that  he  was  “made  in  all  things 
like  unto  his  brethren,”  and  was  “tempted  in  all  points  like  as  they  are” 
is  a  declaration  of  little  significance  for  us,  provided  that,  for  any  reason, 
he  had  a  better  opportunity  for  resisting  temptation,  and  thus  remaining 
holy,  than  we  have. 

4.  He  is  distinctly  held  up  as  an  example  for  our  imitation,  and  we 
are  exhorted  to  be  sinless  because  he  was  :  (1  Pet.  2:  21-23.)  and  where  is 
the  force  of  such  an  exhortation  if  the  possibilities  of  resistance,  on  our  part, 
were  not  equally  favorable  with  his  ?  The  entire  argument  of  the  Apostle  in 
Heb.  2;  10-18  and  4:  14-16,  fails  of  being  satisfactory  the  moment  we 
assume,  for  the  Savior,  superior  advantages  to  ours  for  remaining  holy. 
If  his  temptations  were  less  severe  than  ours;  or  if  his  human  nature 
derived  superior  strength  from  a  union  with  the  divine:  or  if  a  greater 
measure  of  the  Spirit  were  imparted;  or  any  divine  assistance  furnished 
of  which  we  are  deprived,  then  is  there  no  reasonableness  in  the  exhorta¬ 
tion  to  us  to  remain  holy  because  he  did.  Also  if  at  this  point,  he  was 
lifted  out  of  the  plane  of  human  experience,  and  translated  into  that  of 
the  divine,  he  is  no  longer  one  who  can  sympathize  with  us  in  our  temp¬ 
tations  merely  on  the  ground  of  having  been  “himself  tempted,”  which 
is  the  ground  presented. 

There  is  indeed,  no  ground  for  any  other  belief  than  that  every  dis¬ 
advantage  which  human  nature  now  has  in  the  conflict  with  temptation, 
Christ  had;  and  on  the  other  hand,  that  every  advantage  lie  had  for 
resisting  temptation,  and  remaining  holy,  human  nature  now  has;  so  that 
the  fact  that  he  remained  true  to  God  and  duty  is  proof  that  every  human 
being  should  do  the  same. 


5 


82 

in  him,  at  the  outset ,  any  such  occasion  of  sin  as  is  now  insisted 
on.  Answer: 

Many,  and  indeed  most  of  our  theologians  lavish  upon  Adam, 
previous  to  his  fall,  groundless  commendation,  calling  him  not 
only  innocent  and  sinless,  but  holy :  “  heart  full  of  holiness,” 
“  loving  all  that  God  loved,”  [self-denial  ?]  “  spontaneous  to  good,” 
in  short  a  perfect  pattern  of  obedience  ;  thus  making  no  distinc¬ 
tion  between  innocence  and  holiness — between  the  obedience  that 
costs  no  self-denial,  and  the  obedience  that  submits  to  God  under 
a  fair  trial,  and  thus  using,  in  respect  to  Adam,  language  appli¬ 
cable  only  to  a  being  confirmed  in  holiness. 

All  the  character  Adam  had  earned  previous  to  his  fall  was 
earned  only  by  obedience  to  commands  which  crossed  none  of  his 
natural  inclinations,  and  cost  him  no  self-denial — the  law  of  mar¬ 
riage  and  the  Sabbath,  and  the  command  to  dress  and  keep  the 
garden.  No  commands  had  been  imposed  which  interfered  at  all 
with  his  pleasure — his  inclinations;  and  the  commendations  so 
often  lavished  upon  him  for  his  goodness,  obedience  and  holiness 
are  groundless.  It  was  a  goodness  that  cost  nothing,  and  was 
worth  as  little. 

But  to  the  point  in  question:  How  could  obedience  in  such 
circumstances  prove  that  he  had  no  constitutional  disinclination 
to  submit  to  the  proper  and  necessary  restraints  of  law  and  author¬ 
ity  ?  The  fact  was  that  no  sooner  was  he  crossed  than  he  refused 
to  obey.  No  sooner  did  he  find  that  the  tree  was  “  good  for  food, 
and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise,”  and  thus  had  an  in¬ 
clination  awakened  to  partake  of  it,  than  his  love  of  having  his 
own  'way  overpowered  all  other  considerations,  and  in  the  face  of 
commands  and  warnings  and  threatenings,  and  reason  and  con¬ 
science,  broke  out  in  open  rebellion  against  restraint;  and  that 
too  in  so  insignificant  a  matter  as  the  possession  of  a  single  tree, 
when  allowed  freely  to  partake  of  all  the  other  trees  of  the  gar¬ 
den.  Certainly  his  recorded  experience,  so  far  as  it  goes,  proves 
only  the  truth  of  our  position — that  the  occasion  of  sin  is  common 
to  all  moral  beings.  It  is  objected: 

3.  That  the  unfallen  angels  have  not  sinned;  and  how  then 
can  the  occasion  of  sin  be  common  to  all  moral  beings  ?  Answer: 

In  the  Chapter  on  the  unfallen  angels,  Part  II,  the  reasons 
why  they  had  maintained  their  allegiance  were  thus  stated — that 
they  had  seen  the  firmness  of  the  Almighty  in  the  banishment  of 
the  rebel  angels,  and  were  also  brought  into  fierce  and  persistent 
conflict  with  these  same  evil  spirits;  that  the  ungodly  are  tor¬ 
mented  in  their  immediate  presence;  that  they  have  witnessed 
the  mercy  of  God  in  Redemption;  that  they  are  employed  as 
ministering  spirits  to  redeem  saints;  and  appear,  from  the  Scrip¬ 
ture  representations,  to  have  even  a  personal  interest  in  the  work 
of  redemption.  And  now,  in  these  circumstances,  the  fact  that 


83 


they  have  not  sinned  is  no  proof  that  they  had  not,  in  their 
original  constitution,  the  same  love  of  independence,  and  the  same 
inclination  to  break  away  from  the  necessary  restraints  of  law 
and  government,  which  belongs  necessarily,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
the  nature  of  all  moral  beings.  It  is  objected  again: 

4.  That  this  position  assumes  a  similar  element  in  the  human 
nature  of  Christ.  Answer: 

The  Scriptures  themselves  teach  this.  Christ  is  declared  to 
have  been  “ made  in  all  things  like  as  we  are,”  and  to  have  been 
“ tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we  are.”  (Heb.  2 :  17;  4  :  15.)  Also 
it  says  he  “pleased  not  himself”  (Rom.  15:  3);  consequently  went 
against  his  pleasure — his  natural  inclinations  ;  consequently  de¬ 
nied  himself, showing  that  he  had  inclinations  which  needed  to  be 
denied,  just  as  we  have.  TIad  he  “  pleased  himself,”  and  fol¬ 
lowed  his  inclinations,  as  we  do,  he  would  have  sinned;  but  he  said 
rather,  “Not  my  will,  but  thine  be  done.”  By  “will”-  is  here 
meant  wish,  or  inclination;  and  his  inclination  he  resisted.  And 
this  inclination  wras  precisely  the  same  inclination  which  leads  us 
to  sin,  and  would  have  lead  him  to  sin  had  he  not  resisted  it.  At 
this  point,  therefore,  he  was  indeed  tempted  precisely  as  we  are, 
and  therefore  had  in  him  the  same  inclination  to  resist  the  neces¬ 
sary  restraints  of  law  and  government  which  we  and  all  other 
moral  beings  have.  It  is  objected  again: 

5.  That  as  moral  beings  are  made  “in  God’s  image,”  the 
foregoing  position  will  necessitate  self-denial  on  the  part  of  the 
Almighty.  True;  and  obedience  to  the  great  law  of  benevolence, 
to  which  he  also  is  subject,  does  call  for  self-denial  even  on  his 
part.  God  even  claims  it  for  himself,  when  he  says,  “He  doth  not 
afflict  willingly .”  Therefore  by  just  so  much  as  he  does  not, 
must  he  repress  the  immediate  promptings  of  his  pitiful  nature, 
and  because  the  highest  good  demands  it,  deny  himself,  and  still 
continue  the  infliction.  Again,  he  is  unot  willing  that  any  should 
perish;”  and  by  just  so  much  as  he  is  not  willing,  must  he  repress 
the  strong  impulses  of  affection  for  the  creature  he  has  made; 
and  because  the  general  good  demands  the  maintenance  of  his 
Law  and  Government  inviolate,  must  he  still  deny  himself  and 
punish  him  as  he  deserves. 

Thus  in  the  mutual  relations  of  moral  beings,  self-denial  for 
the  general  good  has  become  the  law  of  the  universe.  “If  any 
man  will  come  after  me  let  him  deny  himself,”  (Matt.  16:  24),  is 
undoubtedly  not  merely  the  law  of  this  world,  but  of  all  worlds. 
Even  God  does  not  exempt  himself  from  self-denial;  and  he, 
therefore,  who  refuses  to  practice  it,  and  so  remain  true  to  God 
and  duty,  assails  the  universal  welfare,  disobeys  the  Almighty, 
follows  the  promptings  of  his  own  selfishness,  and  deserves  the 
very  uttermost  of  condemnation. 

There  is,  therefore,  no  valid  objection  to  the  position  we  are 


84 


assuming1 — that  the  occasion  of  sin  is  common  to  the  nature  of 
all  moral  beings  who  either  have  been  or  can  be  created. 

And  so  we  reach  the  appalling  conclusion  that  the  liability, 
tendency  and  temptation  to  rebellion,  growing  out  of  the  love  of 
conscious  freedom  in  a  free  moral  agent,  are  eternal ;  that  all 
through  the  coming  ages  there  will  be,  in  all  moral  beings,  at  the 
outset  of  their  existence,  the  same  constitutional  tendency  to  re¬ 
bellion  which  has  already  broken  out  in  the  sinning  angels  and 
men;  that  here  is  an  endless  difficulty  to  be  endlessly  met  and 
surmounted  by  the  Almighty;  because  whatever  influences  are 
necessary  at  any  time  to  restrain  it,  will  be  always  necessary,  and 
will  need  to  be  used  with  each  succeeding  race  of  moral  beings, 
as  they  shall  be  successively  created  for  peopling  the  universe  of 
worlds;  so  that  to  manage  and  control  it,  and  keep  it  from  break¬ 
ing  out  in  open  rebellion,  will  be  the  endless  work  of  the  endless 
ages. 

This  reluctance  to  submission,  to  the  restraints  of  law  and 
government  which  will  appertain  to  all  newly-created  beings  here¬ 
after,  is  a  fearful  emergency  and  exigency  in  the  unfoldings  of 
the  future  universe,  because  of  the  manifest  liability  and  danger 
that  it  will  break  out  hereafter  and  forever  in  other  and  future 
races. 

Now,  therefore,  this  tendency  to  insubordination  must  be 
met — must  be  grappled  with  with  the  very  energies  of  omnipo¬ 
tence.  It  must  be  kept  down  hereafter  and  forever  in  newly-cre¬ 
ated  beings,  and  kept  down  at  all  hazards  and  any  and  every  con¬ 
ceivable  sacrifice  necessary.  No  matter  what  the  cost  or  sacrifice 
may  be,  anything  that  will  do  this,  must  be  benevolent.  Why? 

It  has  been  already  said  that  only  as  all  wills  were  submitted 
to  the  one  controlling  will  of  the  Almighty  was  there  any  secu¬ 
rity  for  the  welfare  of  the  future  universe.  This  is  true,  but  is  at 
the  same  time  a  very  faint  and  inadequate  statement  of  the  case. 
It  is  also  true  that  without  this  the  whole  moral  universe  would 
become  an  eternal  desolation — an  endless  experience  of  helpless 
and  hopeless  misery.  At  least,  this  accords  with  all  that  we  know 
of  the  workings  of  insubordination  here  in  this  world.  Anywhere 
and  everywhere  in  human  society,  lawlessness  is  temporal  perdi¬ 
tion.  We  see  this  in  an  ungoverned  family,  rendered  wretched 
and  miserable  merely  from  insubordination.  In  our  cities  law¬ 
lessness  is  understood  to  be  an  unmitigated  curse,  transcending  all 
other  sources  of  mischief  and  wretchedness. 

Therefore  it  is  that  the  leaders  of  a  riot  are  shot  and  bayon¬ 
eted  in  the  public  streets  without  mercy,  and  men  feel  that  law 
and  order  are  cheaply  purchased  even  at  this  highest  possible  sac¬ 
rifice — human  life.  And  it  is  only  when  riot  and  lawlessness  are 
quelled,  and  law  and  order  once  more  established,  that  good  men 
breathe  freely  and  sleep  quietly  and  feel  secure.  So  that  on  the 


85 


whole  the  prevalence  of  law  and  order,  and  the  submission  of  men 
to  rightful  authority,  is  felt  to  be  the  only  safeguard  of  the  pub¬ 
lic  welfare,  and  lawlessness  and  insubordination  more  to  be 
dreaded  than  all  other  evils  and  miseries  combined. 

Such  is  the  way  men  feel  and  act  when  only  the  welfare  of 
a  city  of  a  few  thousands  is  concerned.  How  ought  God  to  feel 
when  regarding  the  welfare  of  an  endless  universe  in  precisely 
the  same  conditions?  In  this  future  and  endless  universe,  only 
let  all  moral  beings  insist  on  having  their  own  way,  and  refuse 
submission  to  God’s  government — as  they  will  all  be  inclined  to 
do — and  be  left  unrestrained,  and  they  would  desolate  it  forever. 
Such  a  purpose  of  insubordination  would  run  out  into  collision, 
discord,  and  general  anarchy,  whose  results  of  mischief  and  mis¬ 
ery  would  transcend  all  possibility  of  expression.  In  such  circum¬ 
stances  the  whole  moral  creation  would  become  just  a  universal 
hell.  Instead  of  the  hell  of  the  Bible — a  single  place  of  punish¬ 
ment  for  incorrigible  offenders — the  universe  itself  would  be  hell, 
in  which  lawlessness  and  discord  would  run  riot,  and  the  conse¬ 
quent  suffering,  agony,  and  torment  become  indescribable,  uncon¬ 
trollable,  and  eternal. 

This  is  why  this  inclination  to  lawlessness  must  be  kept  down, 
no  matter  at  what  sacrifice,  and  ichy  any  thing  that  will  accom¬ 
plish  this,  no  matter  how  severe,  becomes  the  merest  dictate  of 
benevolence. 

Here  comes  in  the  vital  question, — will  any  thing  do  this? 
which  leads  to  the  consideration  of  the  following  section: 

Sec.  2.  How  can  the  future  universe  be  saved  from  apostasy? 

This  is  the  grand  problem  to  be  solved,  and  one  to  which,  in 
the  very  nature  of  the  case,  every  thing  else  must  be  made  sub¬ 
ordinate  and  subservient. 

1.  This  rebellion  to  which  the  future  universe  will  be 
tempted,  cannot  consistently  be  prevented  by  the  mere  exertion 
of  divine  power. 

For  this  future  universe  is  to  be  a  system  of  free  moral  agents 
— free  to  obey  God,  or  to  disobey  him;  and  this  freedom  must 
not  be  interfered  with.  And  so  the  question  is:  How  shall  this 
universe  of  free  moral  beings  be  secured  in  the  exercise  of  its 
freedom,  and  still  be  protected  forever  from  the  disastrous  inroads 
of  rebellion,  insubordination,  and  anarchy,  and  be  held  forever  in 
intelligent  and  voluntary  loyalty  to  God  ? 

And  this  makes  the  problem  of  its  future  development  a 
tremendously  serious  one,  because  there  is  opened  before  it  these 
two  endlessly  diverging  paths,  on  either  of  which  it  is  free  to  enter 
— one  of  endless  and  ever-increasing  holiness  and  blessedness,  the 
other  of  endless  sin  and  wretchedness;  and  which  of  the  two  it 


86 


shall  take  in  the  question,  and  how  shall  it  be  kept  true  to  God 
and  duty  is  the  problem  to  be  solved. 

Some  never  think  of  this,  and  suppose  God,  on  account  of  his 
omnipotence,  the  mere  exertion  of  physical  power,  could  make  a 
moral  system  move  on  in  harmony,  holiness,  and  happiness  as 
easily  as  he  could  make  the  sun  to  rise  in  the  heavens;  when,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  physical  power,  even  though  it  be  omnipotent, 
cannot  touch  it.  God’s  great  moral  system  of  the  universe  can 
be  guided  and  protected  forever  only  by  moral  influences,  by 
motives,  by  a  government  whose  foundations  are  laid  in  reward 
and  punishment,  promises  and  threaten ings,  invitations  and  warn¬ 
ings,  and  which  must  be  wielded  forever  through  these  instru¬ 
mentalities  alone. 

The  position  that  because  God  is  omnipotent  he  can  compel 
a  moral  being,  and  so  enforce  obedience  and  prevent  sin  and  its 
punishment,  assumes  that  moral  beings  are,  in  some  respects,  like 
machines  ;  that  mind  can  be  governed  somewhat,  at  least,  like 
matter — that  it  can  be  controlled,  as  matter  is,  by  force;  and  if 
that  force  be  only  omnipotent,  then,  of  course,  all  that  opposes 
must  yield,  and  all  effectual  resistance  become  impossible;  and 
so  sin  be  prevented,  and  obedience  secured,  by  the  mere  exertion 
of  power. 

But  this  view  contradicts  both  the  Bible  and  reason.  The 
Bible  says  men  do  resist — even  that  they  resist  God,  and  resist 
him  successfully.  Said  Stephen  to  the  wicked  Jews:  “  Ye  do 
always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost;  as  your  fathers  did,  so  do  ye” — 
asserting  thus  that  the  Jewish  nation  had  resisted  him  for  cen¬ 
turies. 

Said  our  Saviour  to  Jerusalem  :  “  How  often  would  I  have 
gathered  thy  children  together  as  a  hen  doth  gather  her  brood 
under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not ” — where  the  statement  is 
equally  decisive,  that  even  the  Almighty  Saviour  was  successfully 
resisted  in  his  kind  efforts  to  save.  “  Ye  would  not'1’’  is  the  grand, 
appalling  difficulty  that  baffles  even  omnipotence  in  its  benevo¬ 
lent  efforts  for  human  salvation,  and  such  our  Saviour  represented 
it. 

But  says  some  one,  £‘  How  can  omnipotence  be  resisted?” 
Answer:  By  the  moral  power  of  a  moral  being.  Omnipotence  is 
only  physical  power,  and  has  no  natural  relations  to  moral  power, 
and  cannot  touch  it.  But  no  matter  for  the  how.  The  fact  is 
all  we  are  concerned  with.  It  is  resisted.  Said  Stephen:  “  Ye 
do  always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost.”  Was  it  a  weak  instrumentality 
they  were  resisting,  either  in  its  nature  or  exertion  ?  No.  It  was 
God’s  omnipotent  Spirit,  working  out  the  infinite  unwillingness 
of  God  that  men  should  perish  which  they  were  resisting;  in  its 
nature  the  mightiest,  in  its  exertion  the  mightiest.  Such  is  the 
Bible  representation. 


87 


Look  now  at  the  reason  of  the  case.  Evidently  a  moral  sys¬ 
tem  cannot  be  governed  by  material  forces  any  more  than  a 
material  and  physical  system  by  moral  forces.  It  is  clear  that  the 
solar  system  cannot  be  managed  by  persuasion,  nor  the  engineer 
drive  his  locomotive  by  advice.  No  less  absurd  would  it  be  to 
imagine  a  system  of  free  moral  agents  as  being  governed  by  mere 
power  and  force. 

Moral  beings  are  not  machines,  and  cannot  be  moved  by  force, 
though  exerted  to  any  extent.  Even  omnipotence  cannot  compel 
freedom,  for  then  it  would  be  freedom  no  longer.  Indeed,  there 
is  no  more  intrinsic  absurdity  in  imagining  an  engineer  to  get  his 
locomotive  on  the  track,  and  then  attempt  to  drive  it  by  reading 
to  it  the  Ten  Commandments,  than  in  supposing  God  to  put  his 
moral  creature  on  the  track  of  free  and  responsible  action,  and 
then  attempting  to  move  him  by  power — by  the  force  of  his  om¬ 
nipotence. 

The  fact  is,  the  two  great  empires  of  matter  and  mind  are 
governed  by  influences  utterly  unlike — one  by  force  and  compul¬ 
sion,  and  the  other  by  motive  and  persuasion.  And  each  must  be 
governed  by  its  own  appropriate  influence.  It  will  be  impossible 
to  govern  either  by  the  influence  that  belongs  to  the  other.  Even 
God  cannot  do  this,  for  then  he  would  act  inconsistently  with  his 
own  works;  and  this  would  involve  self-inconsistency;  and  God 
cannot  act  inconsistently  with  himself,  for  then  he  would  cease  to 
be  God.  So  we  say  that  God  cannot  govern  mind  by  force  any 
more  than  he  can  govern  matter  by  motive. 

Would  it  rob  God  of  his  omnipotence  at  all  to  say  that  he 
cannot  govern  the  solar  system  by  the  Ten  Commandments  ?  Cer¬ 
tainly  not ;  for  this  is  only  saying  that  he  cannot  act  inconsist¬ 
ently  with  his  own  works  ;  that  is,  he  cannot  use  with  matter  an 
influence  appropriate  only  to  mind. 

On  the  other  hand,  would  it  rob  God  of  his  omnipotence  at 
all  to  say  that  he  cannot  convert  men  with  crow-bars  ?  Certainly 
not;  for  this  involves  a  similar  inconsistency.  It  is  only  saying  that 
he  cannot  use  with  mind  an  influence  appropriate  only  to  matter. 
It  plainly  appears,  therefore,  that  force  cannot  be  used  in  the  gov¬ 
ernment  of  mind,  and  that  omnipotence,  or  infinite  force,  is  just 
as  powerless  for  this  as  finite.  Even  God  himself  can  govern  his 
moral  universe  only  by  motive. 

Mind  and  matter,  therefore,  must  both  be  governed  by  influ¬ 
ences  corresponding  with  the  nature  of  each;  and  God  himself 
can  in  no  respect  act  inconsistently  with  the  nature  which  he  has 
given  them.  Therefore: 

2.  The  future  universe  can  be  saved  from  apostasy,  only 
through  the  influence  of  motives  working  against  it. 

Without  attempting  to  demonstrate  the  truth  of  this  asser¬ 
tion,  this  much  is  certainly  true — We  neither  know,  nor  can  im- 


88 


agine  any  other  means  by  which  rebellion  can  be  prevented,  and 
at  the  same  time,  moral  beings  retain  their  freedom. 

Again — We  can  see  no  possible  way  by  which  the  motives 
necessary  for  preventing  rebellion  hereafter  can  be  created, except 
by  God’s  dealings  with  the  rebellion  which  has  already  broken 
out. 

Another  thing — To  all  appearance  past  rebellion  can  be 
treated,  for  this  purpose,  in  only  two  ways ,  namely:  By  judg¬ 
ment  and  mercy;  in  other  words,  by  punishment  and  pardon. 
And  it  should  be  especially  noticed,  that  these  are  the  two  ways 
that  God  has  adopted — On  the  one  hand  he  threatens  everywhere 
in  his  Word  the  most  dreadful  punishment  against  transgression, 
and,  on  the  other,  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  holds  out  every 
possible  encouragement  to  the  sinner  to  repent  of  his  sin,  obtain 
forgiveness  and  be  saved;  and  in  these  two  ivays  has  created  the 
strongest  motives  against  the  commission  of  sin  which,  in  the  na¬ 
ture  of  things,  can  possibly  be  created.  And  he  evidently  intends 
in  this,  that  his  moral  universe  shall  come  under  the  influence  of 
this  two-fold  revelation  of  himself.  Therefore  it  is,  that,  all 
through  the  Bible,  he  has  held  up  himself  and  his  character  in 
this  two-fold  aspect — 

“Behold,  therefore,  the  goodness  and  severity  of  God.” 
(Rom.  11 :22.) 

“The  Lord,  the  Lord  God  merciful  and  gracious,  forgiving 
iniquity,  transgression  and  sin,  and  that  will  by  no  means  clear 
the  guilty .”  (Ex.  34:  6,  7.) 

“  God  is  Love.  Our  God  is  a  consuming  fire.”  (1  Jno.  4:16 
and  Heb.  12:29.) 

“  What  if  God,  willing  to  show  his  wrath  and  to  make  his 
power  known,  endured  with  much  long-suffering  the  vessels  of 
wrath  fitted  to  destruction :  And  that  he  might  make  known  the 
riches  of  his  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy  which  had  afore  pre¬ 
pared  unto  glory.”  (Rom.  9:  22,  23.) 

“  The  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world.”  “  Hide  us  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb.”  (Jno.  1 :29, 
and  Rev.  6:16.) 

“  The  mercy  of  the  Lord  is  from  everlasting  to  everlasting.” 
“  The  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  ungodli¬ 
ness  and  unrighteousness  of  men.”  (Ps.  103:17,  and  Rom.  1:18); 
and  so  on  in  other  passages 

And  this  two-fold  exhibition  of  his  character  as  a  benevolent 
Creator,  and  also  a  righteous  Governor,  is  rendered  necessary  by 
the  circumstances  of  the  case.  For  manifestly  the  future  universe 
of  moral  beings  will  treat  him  in  exact  accordance  with  his  char¬ 
acter.  If  he  is  merely  an  easy-going  and  indulgent  parent,  they 
will  have  for  him  little  respect,  and.  will  treat  him  accordingly. 
But  if  in  addition  to  his  kind  and  benevolent  disposition  and  char- 


89 


acter,  he  gives  evidence  of  being  also  a  firm  and  efficient  govern¬ 
or,  and  who  will  “  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty,”  then  will  they 
necessarily  feel  for  him  a  corresponding  respect,  and  be  likely  to 
yield  unquestioning  submission  to  his  authority. 

The  necessity  for  this  two-fold  aspect  of  his  character  grows 
out  of  the  fact  of  sin.  What  manifestations  of  himself  he  would 
have  made  had  his  subjects  been  always  obedient,  and  what  he 
must  make  now  that  his  authority  has  been  trampled  on,  are  two 
things  widely  different.  In  the  present  circumstances  he  must 
show  both  goodness  and  severity — all  the  love  and  tenderness 
that  he  can,  and  still  only  that  severity  that  he  must. 

We  are  to  notice  now  that  his  goodness  and  severity,  as  they 
find  a  two-fold  exhibition  in  the  punishment  and  pardon  of  sin, 
have  created  the  two  great  motives,  which,  in  the  view  we  are 
taking,  will  bind  the  future  universe  to  God  and  duty  forever. 

Sec.  3.  God's  dealings  with  sin  in  the  way  of  judgment. 

God’s  dealings  with  sin  in  the  way  of  judgment  secure  a  two¬ 
fold  result — they  hold  up  the  Almighty  himself  to  the  gaze  of  the 
universe  as  a  fearful  and  terrible  being,  and  one  who  will  not 
allow  his  commands  to  be  trifled  with  with  impunity;  and  also 
hold  up  the  sin  itself,  in  its  nature  and  consequences,  as  the  most 
dreadful  thing  possible  or  conceivable;  thus  showing  the  justice 
of  God  in  his  severe  dealings  with  it  at  last. 

1.  God’s  past  dealings  with  sin.  Verily  the  record  is  a  fear¬ 
ful  one.  God  has  held  up  himself  to  the  gaze  of  the  universe  as 
a  moral  governor  who  will  not  allow  his  authority  to  be  trampled 
on. 

Notice  his  dealings  with  the  rebel  angels.  Says  Jude  6: 
“The  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  own 
habitation  [alluding  probably  to  some  peculiarity  of  their  proba¬ 
tion],  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains  under  darkness  unto 
the  judgment  of  the  great  day.” 

Says  Peter  (2  Pet.  2:4):  “God  spared  not  the  angels  that 
sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell.”  Spared  not — an  expression 
designed  doubtless  to  meet  those  who  would  insist  that  God  was 
too  good  to  punish,  and  would  spare  to  inflict  it. 

Our  Savior  declares  in  Matthew  25  :  41  that  the  everlasting 
fire  was  prepared  originally  “for  the  devil  and  his  angels.”  No 
lack  of  firmness  and  terribleness  in  dealing  with  the  first  sinners. 

How  has  he  dealt  with  the  sinners  of  this  world  in  times 
past?  He  drowned  the  old  world  for  its  wickedness  with  the  ex¬ 
ception  of  a  single  family — swept  the  whole  of  them  to  destruc¬ 
tion  just  because  they  were  wicked. 

He  rained  fire  and  brimstone  upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and 
the  cities  of  the  plain  for  their  wickedness,  and  the  Head  Sea  to¬ 
day  rolls  over  them. 


90 


He  destroyed  seven  nations  in  the  land  of  Canaan  for  the 
same  reason.  In  one  slaughter  of  them  he  “cast  down  upon  them 
great  stones  from  heaven  even  unto  Azekah,”  (Josh.  10:  11.)  so 
that  more  perished  by  the  hail-stones  than  the  sword;  and  the 
sun  stood  still  in  mid-heaven  a  whole  day  that  the  slaughter 
might  be  complete.  And  it  was  all  for  their  wickedness;  for  the 
record,  in  Deuteronomy  9:5,  is:  “For  the  wickedness  of  these 
nations  the  Lord  thy  God  doth  drive  them  out  from  before  thee.” 
Still  stronger  is  the  statement  in  Leviticus,  18:25:  “  The  land  is 

defiled;  therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquity  thereof  upon  it.”  I  do 
it.  It  was  not  merely  one  nation  dispossessing  another,  but  God 
coming  down  upon  them  in  righteous  indignation  for  their  wick¬ 
edness.  No  lack  of  energy  in  dealing  with  those  nations  for 
their  sin. 

Then,  too,  he  visited  the  wicked  Israelites  in  the  wilderness 
with  pestilence  and  earthquakes,  and  fire  and  fiery  serpents,  until 
only  two  out  of  the  whole  nation,  over  twenty  years  old  when 
they  left  Egypt,  remained  alive.  And  this  wholesale  destruction 
all  came  upon  them  for  their  wickedness ,  and  was  God’s  direct 
and  personal  visitation. 

He  has,  therefore,  shown  himself  a  fearful  Being  in  the  un¬ 
relenting  hostilitv  to  sin  manifested  whenever  he  has  taken  it  in 
hand,  either  in  the  angels,  or  in  the  past  ages  of  the  world. 

2.  How  is  he  dealing  with  it  now  ?  What  motives  is  he 
appealing  to  now  in  his  treatment  of  it  ?  The  death  that  we  all 
fear,  and  that  shall  ere  long  overtake  us  all,  comes  upon  men  for 
their  sin,  and  is  the  animadversion  of  a  righteous  God  upon  the 
wickedness  of  the  world.  “  Death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that 
all  have  shined.”  And  “the  sting  of  death  is  sin;”  and  sinners 
on  a  death- bed — find  it  so. 

Look  also  at  all  the  woes  and  miseries  which  God  still  makes 
to  come  on  men  for  their  wickedness.  “  The  wrath  of  God  is 
revealed  from  heaven  against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteous¬ 
ness  of  men.”  (Horn.  1:18.)  “  His  power  and  his  wrath  is  against 

all  them  that  forsake  him.”  (Ezra  8:22.)  In  accordance  with  this 
he  has  made  this  wicked  world  a  slaughter-pen  and  a  charnel- 
house — a  world  of  tears  and  groans,  and  sufferings  and  death. 
He  “  visits  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children.”  He 
makes  “  the  way  of  the  transgressors  hard;”  and  “the  wages  of 
sin  is  death  ”  by  his  constant  visitation.  “  The  face  of  the  Lord 
is  against  them  that  do  evil.”  “The  way  of  the  ungodly  shall  per¬ 
ish.”  “  The  curse  of  the  Lord  is  in  the  house  of  the  wicked.” 
“  Behold,  the  righteous  shall  be  recompensed  in  the  earth;  much 
more  the  wicked  and  the  sinner.” 

Notice  also,  the  attitude  of  God  towards  sin  in  these  passages 
“  Behold,  the  Lord  cometh  out  of  his  place  to  punish  the  inhabit¬ 
ants  of  the  earth  for  their  iniquity.”  (Is.  26:  21.)  Also  Deu- 


91 


teronomy  32:  35,  41:  “To  me  belongeth  vengeance  and  recom¬ 
pense;  their  foot  shall  slide  in  due  time,  for  the  day  of  their  ca¬ 
lamity  is  at  hand,  and  the  things  that  shall  come  upon  them  make 
haste.  ...  If  I  whet  my  glittering  sword,  and  mine  hand  take 
hold  on  judgment,  I  will  render  vengeance  to  mine  enemies,  and 
will  reward  them  that  hate  me.” 

And  all  the  evils  and  sufferings  of  the  world  are  his  own  per¬ 
sonal  visitation.  “  Shall  there  be  evil  in  a  city,  and  the  Lord  hath 
not  done  it  ?”  (Amos  3:  6.)  And  thus  God  is  warning  men  in 
trumpet  tones  to  beware  of  sin  because  of  the  judgments  that  he 
makes  to  follow  it. 

But  the  most  distinct  and  energetic  appeal  to  the  motive  of 
fear  is  made  by  our  Saviour  himself,  in  Luke  7 :  4,  5 :  “  Be  not 
afraid  of  them  that  kill  the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more 
that  they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye  shall  fear: 
Fear  him  which,  after  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell; 
yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear  him.” 

Notice  also  that  the  expression,  the  wrath  of  God,  as  directed 
against  sin,  is  used  in  the  Bible  no  less  than  one  hundred  and 
tvwnty-six  times ,  as  any  one  may  readily  see  by  consulting  a  con¬ 
cordance.  In  fact,  the  pages  of  inspiration  fairly  blaze  with  the 
wrath  of  God  against  sin.  And  so,  by  all  these  dealings  with  sin, 
God  has  been  and  is  holding  up  its  enormity  and  heinousness,  as 
well  as  his  own  personal  detestation  of  it,  to  the  gaze  of  the 
universe. 

3.  We  notice  how  he  will  treat  it  hereafter — not  forever; 
we  have  not  yet  reached  that.  We  only  note  the  fact  now  that 
the  finger  of  inspiration,  pointing  a  little  way  into  the  future,  dis¬ 
closes  still  the  Almighty  dealing  with  the  wicked  in  a  fearful  and 
terrible  manner.  John  the  Baptist  came  preaching  in  the  wilder¬ 
ness  of  Judea,  “Flee  from  the  wrath  to  come .”  And  Paul,  in  1 
Thessalonians  1:10,  speaks  of  “Jesus,  which  delivered  us  from 
the  virath  to  comef  That  is  a  terrific  expression,  and  it  must  re¬ 
fer  to  something  in  the  future  that  is  exceedingly  dreadful.  We 
find  also  in  Matthew  25:41,  after  the  winding  up  of  this  world’s 
history,  and  amid  the  revelations  of  the  final  judgment-day,  that 
the  Judge  will  say  to  those  on  the  left-hand,  “  Depart  from  me, 
ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire.” 

Also  in  Revelation  21:8,  the  declaration  is:  “But  the  fear¬ 
ful,  and  unbelieving,  and  the  abominable,  and  murderers,  and 
whoremongers,  and  sorcerers,  and  idolaters,  and  all  liars,  shall 
have  their  part  in  the  lake  which  burneth  with  fire  and  brimstone; 
which  is  the  second  death.” 

And  so,  as  Revelation  gives  us  this  last  glimpse  of  the  wicked 
— as  we  peer  a  little  way  into  the  future  to  ascertain  their  condi¬ 
tion,  we  see  them  only  sinking  in  torment,  and  quailing  beneath 
the  heavy  thunderbolts  of  God’s  wrath.  Notice,  it  is  the  last 


92 


glimpse,  with  nothing  to  relieve  it — not  a  word  intimating  any 
change  afterward;  not  a  syllable  from  Genesis  to  Revelation  tel¬ 
ling  of  any  different  experience  in  the  future;  not  a  ray  of  light 
indeed  from  any  source  to  relieve  the  dreadful  darkness;  and,  to 
all  appearance,  a  night  of  desolation,  with  no  morn  beyond  it, 
is  closing  about  them.  What  do  we  properly  infer  from  this  ? 
Plainly  this:  that  God  will  continue  to  deal  with  sinners  in  the 
future  world,  even  as  he  has  here,  only  with  far  greater  severity; 
that  he  will  array  himself  against  them  there  with  no  less  terrible 
energy  than  here;  and  even  make  a  more  clear,  decided,  and  en¬ 
ergetic  appeal  to  the  universe  by  their  punishment  in  the  future 
world  than  he  has  made  thus  far  in  this.  What  depth  and  dread- 
fulness  of  meaning,  therefore,  to  the  infinite  mind  must  there  be 
in  that  compassionate  appeal  of  God  to  sinful  men:  “  O  that  they 
were  wise,  that  they  would  consider  their  latter  end !  ”  (Deut. 
32:29.) 

Sec.  4.  The  object  of  God  hi  hie  fearful  dealings  with  the 
wicked. 

There  is  a  reason  for  it.  There  is  some  good  reason  for  his 
past,  present  and  future  dealings  with  sinners  in  the  way  of  judg¬ 
ment.  God  does  not  take  this  course  with  them  without  a  seri¬ 
ous  and  earnest  purpose,  as  well  as  a  distinct  object  in  view.  No¬ 
tice  again,  in  brief  review,  the  terrible  energy  and  persistency 
with  which  he  has  followed  up  this  line  of  conduct.  He  drowned 
the  old  world  ;  he  destroyed  Sodom;  he  exterminated  the  Caan- 
anites;  he  slew  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness;  his  wrath  is  re¬ 
vealed  from  heaven  now  against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteous¬ 
ness  of  men,  and  he  will  say  to  the  wicked  at  the  final  judgment, 
“  Depart,  ye  cursed.”  Now  again,  why f  Is  it  to  gratify  personal 
anger,  personal  revenge,  personal  spite?  Is  it  to  make  a  vain  ex¬ 
hibition  of  his  power  ?  If  not,  what?  Why  these  fearful  deal¬ 
ings?  Is  it  a  remedial  agency — an  effort  to  reform  these  wicked 
ones?  The  physician’s  way  to  cure  a  man  is  not  to  kill  him;  that 
is  not  a  remedial  way  of  working.  What  did  the  deluge  that 
swept  the  sinners  of  the  old  world  to  destruction,  or  the  rain  of 
fire  and  brimstone  upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  the  cities  of 
the  plain,  do  for  them  in  the  line  of  reformation f  Then  what  is 
the  object  ?  Let  the  Bible  answer,  as  it  does  in  2  Pet.  2:6,  “Turn¬ 
ing  the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  into  ashes,  condemned 
them  with  an  overthrow,  making  them  an  example  unto  those 
that  after  should  live  ungodly.” 

The  record  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  in  Jude  7  includes  the 
same  statement — that  they  “  are  set  forth  for  an  example.”  Also 
the  record  of  the  sinning  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  in  1  Corin¬ 
thians  10:  6,  11,  is  that  all  the  calamities  that  came  on  them  for 
their  sinful  conduct  were  to  make  them  an  example  to  us,  teach- 


93 


ing  us  that  we  should  not  “  lust  after  evil  things  ”  as  they  did, 
nor  be  “  idolaters  ”  as  they  were,  nor  “  commit  fornication,”  nor 
“  tempt  Christ,”  nor  “  murmur,”  as  they  did  ;  and  “  all  these 
things,”  it  says,  “  happened  unto  them  for  examples,  and  are 
written  for  our  admonition .” 

Here  notice  that  this  punishment  was  inflicted  upon  the  sin¬ 
ners  mentioned  for  the  sake  of  those  who  should  come  after 
them.  It  was  to  prevent  sin  afterward,  in  future  nations  and 
races  of  the  world,  that  the  punishment  was  inflicted.  Why,  then, 
may  not  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  in  the  next  world  be  for 
the  future  races  of  the  universe,  and  to  keep  them  from  apostasy? 

We  find  indeed  that  this  is  the  exact  use  God  will  make  of 
those  judgments  in  the  coming  ages.  Even  the  angels  in  heaven, 
we  find,  need  to  witness  the  torments  of  the  damned.  It  is  not 
enough  that  they  gaze  with  wonder  upon  the  glory  and  grandeur 
of  redemption,  and  “  desire  to  look  into  it.”  It  is  not  enough  for 
them  to  sing  with  the  elders,  “Worthy  is  the  Lamb.”  It  is  not 
enough  for  them  to  be  “  ministering  spirits  sent  forth  to  minister 
for  them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation.”  The  record  also  is  in 
Revelation  14:  10,  that  the  wicked  should  “be  tormented  in  the 
presence  of  the  holy  angels,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb.” 
And  here  we  repeat  the  question,  Why  in  the  presence  of  the  an¬ 
gels,  if  this  dreadful  sight  is  not  necessary  ?  VVhy  necessary,  but 
for  its  moral  effect  upon  them  ?  What  moral  effect  can  be  con¬ 
ceived  but  to  keep  them  from  apostasy  ?  Why  in  the  presence 
of  the  Lamb,  but  to  indicate  that  judgment  and  mercy  go  hand 
in  hand,  and  that  with  all  his  infinite  affection  he  yet  approves  of 
this  righteous  judgment  upon  the  wicked.  For,  although  Christ 
will  sit  upon  the  throne  of  the  universe  as  the  great  Redeemer, 
and  the  illustration  to  the  universe  forever  of  God’s  mercv  to  the 
sinful,  yet  the  record  in  Revelation  6:  15,  16,  is  also  this:  “And 
the  kings  of  the  earth,  and  the  great  men,  and  the  rich  men,  and 
the  chief  captains,  and  the  mighty  men,  and  every  bondman,  and 
every  free  man,  hid  themselves  in  the  dens  and  in  the  rocks  of  the 
mountains;  and  said  to  the  mountains  and  rocks,  Fall  on  us,  and 
hide  us  from  the  face  of  him  that  sitteth  on  the  throne,  and  from 
the  wrath  of  the  Lamb.” 

And  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  closes  with  this:  That  in  the 
coming  ages,  when  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth  shall  have 
been  inaugurated,  “  the  hand  of  the  Lord  shall  be  known  toward 
his  servants,  and  his  indignation  toward  his  enemies.  And  they 
shall  go  forth  and  look  upon  the  carcasses  of  the  men  that  have 
transgressed  against  me;  for  their  worm  shall  not  die,  neither 
shall  their  fire  be  quenched;  and  they  shall  be  an  abhorring  unto 
all  flesh.”  In  this  last  expression  we  see  the  reason  given  for 
these  fearful  dealings  of  God  with  sinful  men.  It  is  to  make 
wickedness  abhorrent.  It  is  to  so  hold  it  up  to  the  gaze  of  the 


94 


universe  that  all  moral  beings  shall  fear  it — fear  its  consequences 
and  fear  to  commit  it.  And  for  this  it  is  that  in  his  past,  present, 
and  future  dealings  with  sinners  he  is  seen  to  be  persistently  exe¬ 
cuting  upon  them  the  fierceness  of  his  anger,  thus  making  them 
an  example  and  a  warning  to  the  future  races  of  the  universe. 

Sec.  5.  How  long  will  punishment  continue  ? 

Here  we  meet  the  great  point  in  controversy  at  the  present 
time — The  doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment,  respecting  which 
even  wise  and  good  men  have  had  distressing  doubts  and  diffi¬ 
culties.* 

Confining  their  thought  mainly  to  this  world,  and  taking 
counsel  of  their  own  feelings  rather  than  the  great,  underlying- 
principles  of  God’s  moral  government  over  an  endless  universe, 
they  have  come  to  regard  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  as 
intrinsically  absurd,  and  hence  conclude  that  the  Bible  does  not 
teach  it.  With  such  the  Scripture  argument  is  powerless ;  the 

*The  oft  quoted  passage  from  the  late  Rev.  Albert  Barnes  of  Philadel¬ 
phia,  is  a  good  illustration  of  the  condition  into  which  many  superior,  but 
not  specially  philosophical  or  anylytical  minds,  are  thrown  by  the  failure 
to  grasp  the  conditions  of  this  problem  of  evil  and  its  punishment. 

“These  are  real,  not  imaginary  difficulties.  *  *  *  I  confess  for  one, 
I  feel  them  and  feel  them  the  more  sensible  and  powerful,  the  more  I 
look  at  them,  and  the  longer  I  live.  *  *  *  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  a  ray 
of  light  on  this  subject,  which  I  had  not  when  the  subject  first  flashed 
across  my  soul.  I  have  read  to  some  extent  what  wise  and  good  men 
have  written.  I  have  looked  at  their  various  theories  and  explanations. 
I  have  endeavored  to  weigh  their  arguments,  for  my  whole  soul  pants  for 
light  and  relief  on  these  questions.  But  I  get  neither;  and  in  the  distress 
and  anguish  of  my  own  spirit,  I  confess  that  I  see  no  light  whatever,  I 
see  not  one  ray  to  disclose  to  me  why  sin  came  into  the  world;  why  the 
earth  is  strewn  with  the  dying  and  the  dead,  and  why  men  must  suffer  to 
all  eternity.  I  have  never  seen  a  particle  of  light  thrown  on  these  sub¬ 
jects  that  lias  given  a  moment’s  ease  to  my  tortured  mind.  *  *  *  It  is  all 
dark,  dark,  dark  to  my  soul,  and  I  cannot  disguise  it.” 

And  yet  in  the  face  of  all  this  midnight  that  was  resting  on  his  soul, 
it  is  gratifying  to  see  with  what  unwavering  firmness  he  held  still  to  the 
word  of  God.  No  going  after  superficial  explanations  or  doubtful  exe¬ 
gesis  in  order  to  smooth  over  and  soften  down  the  stern  declarations  of 
revealed  truth,  but  an  unswerving,  unflinching  denunciation  of  the  wrath 
of  God  as  revealed  in  the  Bible  against  the  finally  impenitent.  He  might 
not  understand  the  reason  or  see  the  benevolence  of  the  Divine  declara¬ 
tions  respecting  future  and  endless  punishment,  and  all  was  “  dark,  dark” 
to  him,  but  he  saw  that  the  declarations  themselves  were  clear  and  un¬ 
mistakable;  and,  therefore,  not  a  trace  of  misgiving  can  be  detected  in  all 
his  commentaries  when  bringing  the  tlireatenings  of  eternal  perdition 
against  the  ungodly.  It  was  enough  for  him  that  God  had  said  it.  Wit¬ 
ness  his  commentary  on  Rev.  22;  11.  He  says — “The  argument  for  the 
eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  as  strong  as  that  for  the  eternal  hap¬ 
piness  of  the  righteous;  and  if  the  one  is  open  to  doubt,  there  is  no  secu¬ 
rity  for  the  performance  of  the  other;”  and  his  entire  commentaries  har¬ 
monize  with  this  declaration. 


95 

matter  being  wholly  prejudged  and  decided  before  the  Bible  is 
reached. 

To  meet  the  case  of  such,  it  seems  desirable  that  an  argument 
be  constructed  outside  of  the  Bible,  showing  the  possibility  at 
least,  and  even  the  reasonableness,  of  endless  punishment  from 
the  light  of  nature ;  for  if  the  doctrine  be  shown  to  be  possible , 
its  unreasonableness  cannot  be  demonstrated ;  and  if  shown  to  be 
reaso7iable ,  then  the  way  will  be  cleared,  in  Christian  minds  at 
least,  for  accepting  without  question  the  plain  declarations  of  the 
Inspired  Word. 

To  take  the  lowest  position  first — 

1.  Endless  Punishment  Possible. 

1.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  sin  has  not  been  prevented  ;  and,  for 
some  reason,  the  fact  militates  not  at  all  against  the  benevolence 
of  God.  But  the  same  reasons  for  its  non-prevention  thus  far, 
may  exist  forever ,  and  sin,  with  its  inevitable  and  painful  conse¬ 
quences,  be  therefore  eternal ,  with  no  compromise  of  the  Divine 
Benevolence. 

2.  The  exigencies  of  the  Moral  System  demand  the  present 
infliction  of  suffering,  and  no  one  is  competent  to  say  how  long 
these  exigencies  may  continue.  For  aught  any  one  can  say, 
they  may  continue  always  ;  and  therefore,  the  unreasonableness 
of  endless  suffering  cannot  be  demonstrated. 

3.  To  all  appearance  the  occasion  of  sin  is  endless,  growing 
out  of  the  love  of  conscious  freedom,  and  inseparable  from  the 
nature  of  all  moral  beings ;  and,  therefore,  to  all  appearance, 
there  will  be  the  same  eter7ial  tendency  to  rebellion  which  has 
already  broken  out  in  the  sinning  angels  and  men  ;  and  no  man  is 
qualified  to  assert  that  endless  punishment  may  not  be  an  indis¬ 
pensable  influence  to  keep  down  this  endless  tendency,  and  pre¬ 
vent  it  from  running  on  and  running  out  into  endless  and  ever 
expanding  desolations  ;  and,  therefore,  endless  punishment  is 
possible. 

4.  To  make  this  matter  more  general  God  is  now  apparently 
laying  the  foundations  of  a  moral  administration  over  a  universe 
expanding  through  all  the  endless  ages.  Does  any  man  know 
enough  to  make  the  intelligent  assertion  that  mere  temporary 
penalty  will  lay  those  foundations  with  sufficient  stability  and  se¬ 
curity  to  stand  the  strain  of  eternity  ?  A  finite  creature  of  a  day, 
what  knows  he  respecting  the  necessities  and  exigencies  of  an 
endless  universe  into  which  sin  has  entered,  and  which  it  threatens 
to  defile  forever,  that  he  can  pronounce  with  any  assurance  as  to 
what  may  be  or  may  not  be  necessary  in  the  way  of  penalty  to 
guide  and  govern  and  control  it  in  its  endless  progression  and 


96 


expansion  ?  In  the  sweep  of  those  stupendous  possibilities  which 
environ  such  a  universe,  human  conjecture  even  is  weak  and  in¬ 
sufficient,  and  human  assertion  folly. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  he  who  asserts  the  absurdity  of  end¬ 
less  punishment,  assumes#that  he  does  understand,  and  can  meas¬ 
ure  these  tremendous  matters — that  he  knows  positively  that 
finite  motives  are  sufficient  to  bind  a  universe  of  free  mind  in 
obedience  to  God  forever ;  when  the  fact  is  he  does  not  know  it, 
and  is  competent  to  make  no  such  assertion. 

The  truth  is,  endless  penalty  in  an  endless  administration  is 
possible,  and  the  bare  possibility  of  it  more  terrific  than  all  the 
other  certainties  of  the  universe. 

We  now  advance  to  a  stronger  position. 

2.  Endless  Punishment  Probable. 

1.  The  principle  obtains  in  all  human  governments,  that 
punishment  shall  correspond  wiih  the  mischief  of  the  sin,  and  the 
evil  consequences  flowing  from  it,  and  men  graduate  penalty  ac¬ 
cordingly.  For  example — Forgery  is  an  act  requiring  only  two 
or  three  seconds;  but  it  touches  the  sacredness  of  a  name;  it  as¬ 
sails  the  great  foundations  of  commerce  and  business,  and  if  not 
followed  by  appropriate  penalty,  wTould  destroy  commercial  integ 
rity,  and  break  up  the  confidence  of  men  in  each  other,  and  ren¬ 
der  the  prosecution  of  honorable  business  impossible.  It  is  there¬ 
fore  visited  with  a  penalty  correspondingly  severe. 

To  fire  a  dwelling  requires  no  longer  time  than  forgery,  but 
is  regarded  as  a  far  greater  crime,  in  that  it  endangers  not  only 
property  but  life ;  and  the  penalty  is  made  to  correspond  in  se¬ 
verity. 

So  we  measure  the  enormity  of  sin  in  God’s  universe  by  the 
magnitude  of  the  interests  it  endangers.  Some  never  think  of 
their  sin  as  reaching  in  its  effects  beyond  this  world — never  think 
of  it  in  its  relations  to  the  universal  whole.  But  the  fact  is  every 
sin  committed  against  God,  is  an  act  of  rebellion  against  the  con¬ 
stituted  authority  of  the  universe.  It  is  a  blow  aimed  at  God, 
and  is  an  attempt  to  hurl  him  from  his  throne,  and  desolate  his 
universe  eternally ;  and  it  would  actually  accomplish  this,  if  it  had 
sufficient  power,  and  if  it  were  not  met  by  omnipotent  energy. 

The  nature  of  the  sin,  however,  remains  the  same,  and  its 
character  and  ill-desert  are  to  be  measured,  not  by  what  it  actually 
accomplishes,  but  by  what  it  would  do  if  it  could.  And  the  pun¬ 
ishment  it  deserves  is  to  be  measured  in  the  same  way ;  and  as 
the  mischief  of  sin  in  an  endless  universe  cannot  be  measured,  so 
the  punishment  that  shall  correspond  with  its  heinousness  should 
be  unlimited;  and,  therefore,  endless  punishment  becomes  in 
this  view  probable. 


97 


2.  It  would  seem  that  there  must  be  a  correspondence  be¬ 
tween  the  appropriate  reward  of  obedience,  and  the  proper  pun¬ 
ishment  of  disobedience.  . 

What  reward  then  shall  God  promise  to  obedience  ?  Plainly 
one  that  shall  correspond  with  the  value  of  obedience.  Only  in 
this  way  can  his  administration  be  harmonious.  But  who  can 
estimate  the  value  of  obedience  in  God’s  moral  system  ?  Not 
only  an  eternal  universe  of  moral  being  is  dependent  on  it  for 
happiness,  but  a  universe  to  whose  expansion  there  is  apparently 
no  limit.  In  this  view  the  value  of  obedience  to  God  cannot  be 
measured  any  more  than  the  welfare  and  happiness  of  an  endless 
universe  can  be  measuerd.  It  is  limitless,  and  no  limited  and 
temporary  reward  can  be  at  all  harmonious  with  it. 

But  the  same  train  of  reasoning  applies  necessarily  to  the 
penalty  for  transgression.  The  mischief  and  misery  of  sin  in  such 
a  universe  are  as  we  have  seen,  limitless — beyond  all  computation 
or  measurement,  and  the  penalty  threatened  must  correspond; 
and  if  reward  should  be  unlimited,  so  should  penalty  be  unlimit¬ 
ed  ;  and  there  is  no  logical  escape  at  this  point  from  the  conclu¬ 
sion  that  limited  and  temporary  penalty  ennexed  to  the  trans¬ 
gression  of  God’s  law  would  be  inharmonious  and  impossible ; 
and  in  this  view,  endless  punishment  for  sin  becomes  altogether 
probable. 

3.  Those  who  have  broken  away  from  God  in  these  incipient 
stages  of  the  moral  universe  have  set  the  example  of  rebellion 
before  an  endless  universe ;  and  that  example  will  certainly  be 
followed  unless  the  transgressors  be  so  dealt  with  as  to  prevent 
it.  The  influence  of  that  example  will  be  felt  forever  un¬ 
less  thoroughly  and  completely  counteracted.  How  it  can 
be  thus  counteracted  by  any  punishment  less  than  un¬ 
limited,  it  is  impossible  to  see ;  for  if  punishment  be 
limited,  then  the  time  will  come  when  there  will  be  no  punish¬ 
ment,  and  then  the  next  race  of  beings  created  will  not  only  have 
no  present  and  tangible  evidence  of  the  evil  consequences  of 
transgression,  but  the  sole  record  of  the  past  will  be  that  those 
who  dared  rebellion  were  only  temporarily  punished,  and  that  the 
infliction  is  passed,  and  is  all  over  with,  and  that,  with  the  excep¬ 
tion  of  this  comparatively  brief  endurance  of  suffering,  they  are 
as  well  off  now  as  if  they  had  never  sinned.  It  is  very  easy  to 
see  that  such  dealings  with  the  sinful  would  have  very  little  influ¬ 
ence  in  the  way  of  motive  to  counteract  their  evil  example,  and 
very  little  tendency  to  deter  others  from  a  similar  rebellion  ;  and 
this  makes  endless  punishment  probable. 

4.  As  an  appeal  to  fear  no  threatening  of  punishment  less 
than  endless  would  have  any  influence  to  prevent  sin  ;  for  the 
universe  of  moral  beings  would  reason  hereafter  just  as  wicked 
men  do  in  this  world  who  assume  limited  penalty,  and  therefore 


98 


make  no  effort  to  stop  sinning.  .  They  reason  in  this  way  :  If 
penalty  be  limited,  then  it  will  end  some  time,  and  there  will  be 
an  eternity  of  happiness  beyond  it,  in  comparison  with  which  all 
limited  punishment  will  become  at  length  and  infinitesimal — 
absolutely  nothing ;  and  therefore  the  threatening  of  such  pun¬ 
ishment  as  a  motive  to  deter  from  sin  will  be  worthless. 

We  may  be  sure,  therefore,  that  such  punishment  God  does 
not  threaten;  for  he  means  to  make  men  truly  fear  sin  and  fear 
him.  And  so  when  the  Savior  says,  “Fear  him  who  is  able  to 
destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear 
him,”  we  may  be  sure  he  meant  to  threaten  something  that  is 
truly  fearful  and  dreadful,  and  therefore  something  more  than 
mere  limited  penalty,  which  would  have  almost  no  effect  to  deter 
from  sin,  and  be  of  no  value  any  way  ;  and  this  looks  strongly  in 
the  direction  of  endless  penalty. 

5.  Penalty  must  be  limited  or  unlimited.  Assume  limited 
penalty,  and  then  to  the  Infinite  Mind  there  would,  in  all  prob¬ 
ability,  result  twro  things  : 

First. — That,  as  it  must  end  some  time,  the  next  race  of  be¬ 
ings  created  after  that  would  certainly  rebel.  Then  they  must  be 
punished ;  and  when  their  punishment  was  ended  the  next  race 
after  them  would  rebel,  and  then  the  next  and  the  next ;  and  so 
sin  and  punishment  be  the  law  of  the  universe  forever,  and  not  a 
single  moral  being  be  established  in  eternal  obedience  to  God — 
sin  always  entering  and  defiling  the  universe  of  God  forever. 

Secondly. — It  may  also  be  certain  to  the  Infinite  Mind  that 
these  same  ones  who  had  sinned  and  been  punished,  and  who  had 
reached  the  end  of  their  punishment,  would,  upon  some  other 
demand  of  his  that  crossed  their  natural  inclinations,  rebel  again 
— their  second  rebellion  to  be  followed  again  by  limited  punish¬ 
ment  ;  and  so  the  process  of  sinning  and  being  punished  keep  on 
thus  through  all  the  ages,  and  the  result  after  ail  be  the  same 
dreadful  fact  which  encumbers  the  orthodox  system — endless  suf - 
faring- the  universe  revolving  in  an  endless  cycle  of  sin  and  punish¬ 
ment,  suffering  and  confusion,  and,  unlike  the  evangelical  system, 
securing  no  substantial  results  of  holiness  and  happiness,  or  the 
final  and  certain  salvation  of  a  single  individual. 

Such,  on  the  ground  of  mere  reason,  would  be  the  possible — 
and  even  probable — effect  of  limited  punishment;  and  nothing 
result  from  it,  to  the  universe  of  God,  but  endless  and  hopless 
disaster,  and  God’s  government  over  it  deserve,  for  its  incom¬ 
petency  and  inefficiency,  infinite  contempt. 

We  see,  therefore,  how  unlimited  or  endless  punishment, 
dreadful  as  it  is,  may  yet  be  inevitable,  and  merciful  even,  on  the 
ground  of  human  reason,  and,  therefore,  that  it  is,  on  this  ac¬ 
count,  also  2^robable. 

6.  A  short  biblical  argument  is  in  place  here.  If  there  is  no 


99 


conclusive  proof  that  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  endless, 
then  is  there  no  conclusive  proof  that  the  happiness  of  the  right¬ 
eous  is  endless  ;  since  precisely  the  same  expressions  are  used  in 
the  Bible  in  reference  to  both. 

But  the  belief  is  universal  that  the  happiness  of  the  righteous 
is  endless ;  and  Christian  men,  at  least,  accept  the  evidence  of  it 
from  the  Bible  as  conclusive.  Therefore  is  the  evidence  from  the 
Bible  equally  conclusive  that  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  is 
endless ;  and  in  this  view,  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  is, 
to  say  the  least,  probable. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  it  appears  that  temporary  penalty 
would  fail,  in  all  probability,  to  arrest  the  progress  and  extension 
of  rebellion  in  God’s  universe.  But  the  penalty  threatened  and 
executed  must  accomplish  this,  or  the  universe  be  left  to  the  un¬ 
speakably  greater  calamity  of  its  unrestrained  prevalence.  Would 
this  be  benevolent1?  We  cannot  see  how. 

We  should  stigmatize  any  government  on  earth  as  incompe¬ 
tent  and  unkind  which  would  not  arrest  the  spread  of  rebellion 
when  once  it  had  broken  out,  and  prevent  it,  if  it  were  able,  ever 
after.  And  no  matter  what  may  be  th &  peculiarities  of  the  state 
or  nation,  the  law  must  be  so  executed  as  to  protect  that  state  or 
nation  as  it  is.  And  if  God’s  great  universe  be  one  of  ceaseless 
and  endless  expansion — if  that  be  its  peculiarity,  then  law  and 
penalty  must  correspond,  and  meet  all  the  necessary  demands  of 
an  eternal  and  eternally  expanding  universe ;  and  if  temporary 
penalty  will  not  meet  these  necessities,  and  arrest  the  spread  of 
rebellion  forever,  then  unlimited  penalty  must  be  substituted, 
and  infinite  benevolence  even,  has  no  room  for  choice  in  the  mat¬ 
ter.  Au  endless  universe  needs  endless  protection,  and  must  have 
it  at  whatever  sacrifice. 

Let  it  be  repeated,  therefore,  we  have  no  reason  for  assum¬ 
ing  that  temporary  penalty  viould  protect  it,  and  arrest  the  pro¬ 
gress  of  rebellion.  For  suppose  the  penalty  for  sin  be  only  limit¬ 
ed  and  finite.  Then  it  is  no  great  matter  if  a  moral  being  has 
broken  the  law  of  Infinite  God,  and  assailed,  by  transgression, 
the  interests  of  his  eternal  universe  ;  he  can  yet,  by  the  endur¬ 
ance  of  a  certain  limited  amount  of  suffering,  cancel  all  his  liabili¬ 
ties,  repair  all  the  injury  done  to  God’s  broken  law,  and  then,  on 
the  ground  of  having  well  and  truly  discharged  all  his  obligations, 
claim  an  eternity  of  happiness  afterwards,  in  comparison  with 
which,  all  he  had  suffered  would  become  an  infinitessimal.  We 
will  suppose  this  to  be  done,  and  that  a  point  is  now  reached 
where  every  sinner  has  paid  the  full  penalty  of  the  law,  and  there 
is  now  no  more  suffering  throughout  God’s  dominions.  At  this 
point,  the  race  of  beings  next  created,  having  now  no  decided 
and  convincing  evidence  of  God’s  hatred  of  sin,  or  of  its  fearful 
nature  and  consequences,  and  also  positive  evidence  that  rebellion 


100 


against  him  was,  in  his  estimation,  an  inconsiderable  and  finite 
matter,  would,  very  likely,  on  this  account,  rebel  as  their  prede¬ 
cessors  had  done :  and  even  the  very  ones  who  had  been  punish¬ 
ed  rebel  again,  their  rebellion  to  be  followed  again  by  punish¬ 
ment  ;  and  so  the  incursions  of  sin  into  God’s  universe,  followed 
by  its  punishment,  would  be  constant,  mischievous  and  eternal ; 
and  the  result,  after  all,  be  endless  suffering. 

No  man  is  competent  to  affirm  that  this  would  not  be  the 
certain  result  of  limited  penalty — that  it  would  fail  to  arrest  the 
spread  of  rebellion,  and  so  leave  the  uiverse  to  writhe  eternally 
under  its  malignant  and  merciless  bondage,  even  deepening  in 
disaster  forevermore. 

Such  a  result  would,  in  all  probability,  be  inevitable  ;  and  for 
this  reason  it  would  seem  the  dictate  of  wisdom  to  confine  and 
restrain  effectually  the  first  manifiestations  of  rebellion,  and  by 
this  prompt  and  decisive  treatment  of  it,  hold  it  up  to  eternal 
abhorrence,  and  thus  prevent  forever,  and  in  the  only  way  pos¬ 
sible,  its  subsequent  incursions  into  God’s  dominions.  Such,  at 
least,  is  the  probable  plan  which  God  has  adopted 

3.  Endless  Punishment  Certain  and  Inevitable. 

The  points  that  look  strongly  in  this  direction  are  the  follow¬ 
ing  :  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  God,  to  his  Law,  and  to  the 
Atonement ;  the  Harmony  of  Divine  administration  ;  the  fact 
that  nothing  more  can  be  done  for  the  sinner  elsewhere,  to  save 
him  than  has  been  done  for  him  in  this  world  ;  and  the  fact  that 
nothing  else  can  be  done  with  him  hereafter  but  to  confine  him 
forever. 

1.  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  God. 

What  God  does  is  the  highest  expression  of  himself ;  and 
what  he  threatens  as  the  penalty  for  sin,  becomes  the  impressive 
manifestation  of  his  character  to  his  universe.  Take  first  the 
lowest  possible  supposition — that  God  should  threaten  nothing, 
for  the  contempt  of  his  law  that  there  should  be  no  penalty. 
What  would  be  the  result  ? 

Any  command  unaccompanied  by  sanctions,  degenerates  into 
mere  advice,  and  loses  even  the  nature  of  Law  ;  so  that  in  issuing 
his  great  command,  “  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all 
thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,”  were  there  no  sanctions 
accompanying  it,  God  would  only  advise  and  not  command  the 
obedience  and  affection  of  his  subjects.  He  would  say,  in  effect, 
that  they  might  act  as  they  pleased  ;  they  might  love  or  hate  him, 
and  they  might  love  or  hate  each  other,  it  was  all  the  same  to 
him;  they  might  act  for  the  general  good,  or  sacrifice  to  any  ex- 


101 


tent  the  welfare  of  his  universe,  and  still,  his  treatment  of  them 
would  in  each  case  be  the  same.  He  would  allow  himself  to  be 
treated  with  contempt,  and  yet  not  notice  with  particular  dis¬ 
pleasure.  Also  he  would  show  that  he  had  but  a  trifling  regard 
for  the  moral  character  of  his  subjects,  and  cared  but  little 
whether  they  weie  good,  bad  or  indifferent  in  character.  His 
command  to  them  to  be  holy  would  indeed  indicate  somewhat  of 
preference  for  holiness,  while  holiness  and  sin  would  yet  be  mat¬ 
ters  cf  so  little  moment  with  him,  that  he  would  make  no  differ¬ 
ence  in  his  treatment  of  them.  What  a  position  this  for  the  God 
of  holiness  to  occupy  before  his  universe  !  He  would  thus  ruin 
his  authority.  Who  would  be  concerned  about  doing  or  not  do¬ 
ing  the  will  of  another,  from  whom,  to  say  the  least,  obedience 
had  nothing  to  hope,  and  disobedience  nothing  to  fear0?  Who 
would  respect  his  character  or  his  will  ?  He  would  stand  before 
his  kingdom  convicted  of  indifference  to  obedience,  and  an  uncon 
cerned  spectator  of  disobedience,  and  would  thus  tempt  his  sub¬ 
jects  to  war  on  each  other  and  on  him,  and  so  defeat  the  great 
and  sole  end  of  moral  government.  Such  would  be  the  necessary 
result  of  no  penalty. 

Take  in  the  second  place  the  supposition  of  temporary 
penalty. 

The  doctrine  of  no  penalty  being  so  manifestly  untenable, 
the  mass  of  men  concede  the  necessity  for  some  sort  of  penalty 
for  transgression  ;  and  that  wicked  men  should  experience,  after 
death,  some  degree  of  suffering  for  sin  ;  although  assuming  per¬ 
haps,  that  the  time  will  come  when  it  will  terminate.  The  doc¬ 
trine  of  limited  and  temporary  penalty  is  therefore,  for  the  most 
part,  the  stronghold  of  those  who  reject  the  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment.  Suppose  then  that  God  should  threaten  limited 
penalty  for  sin  against  himself,  what  would  he  say  ?  He  would 
say  to  his  universe  that  he  had  only  a  limned  and  inferior  regard 
for  his  own  infinite  self — for  his  honor  and  glory  and  worth ;  in 
short,  that  he  had  only  a  limited  amount  of  self-respect. 

In  so  doing,  he  would  sin  against  himself.  He  would  be 
untrue  to  his  own  greatness  and  glory  and  moral  excellence.  He 
would  even  lower  himself  in  his  own  estimation,  for  there  would 
be  a  want  of  correspondence  between  his  own  conscious,  inherent 
and  unbounded  excellence,  and  the  inferior  and  untruthful  ex¬ 
pression  he  was  giving  it.  Because  he  does  estimate  himself 
properly.  He  cares  greatly  how  he  is  treated.  He  values  him¬ 
self  in  exact  accordance  with  his  own  infinite  greatness  and 
glory  ;  and  this  is  beyond  measure.  His  self-respect  is  beyond 
measure.  His  regard  too  for  the  affectionate  obedience  of  his 
moral  creatures  transcends  all  finite  expression.  He  feels  also, 
most  keenly  any  dishonor  that  is  cast  upon  him.  He  says — “  If 
I  be  a  Father  where  is  mine  honor?”  And  the  expression  of 


102 


his  law  is  earnest  and  decisive.  “  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God.’'  In  this  view  the  threatening  of  limited  and  temporary 
penalty  is  impossible. 

Such  threatening  would  also  show  a  limited  and  inferior  re¬ 
gard  for  the  welfare  of  the  endless  universe  of  being  resting  on 
obedience.  And  this  too  would  falsify  his  character ;  because 
the  welfare  and  happiness  of  an  endless  universe  should  be  a 
matter  with  him  of  infinite  regard,  and  must  be,  for  no  other 
feeling  would  correspond  at  all  with  its  limitless  value,  nor  with 
his  own  responsible  guardianship  of  its  unbounded  interests. 

Also  it  would  show  a  limited  and  inferior  regard  for  holiness 
itself — that  crowning  glory  of  his  character,  and  which  led  the 
seraphim  to  exclaim  “  Holy,  holy,  holy  is  the  Lord  of  Hosts,” 
and  which  he  has  enjoined  upon  his  intelligent  creation  as  the 
only  conduct  worthy  of  him  or  of  them — “  Be  ye  holy  for  I  am 
holy.”  And  this  would  be  an  infinite  falsehood — proclaiming  to 
his  universe  that  his  regard  for  holiness  wTas  susceptible  of  finite 
measurement,  when  it  is  not  and  cannot  be. 

And  not  only  would  he  thus  appear  to  his  intelligent  crea¬ 
tures  to  feel  himself  a  limited  and  inferior  regard  for  holiness, 
but  he  would  fail  also  to  give  them  a  correct  impression  of  its 
value ;  even  more,  would  educate  them  to  regard  it  as  a  matter 
of  secondary  consideration  ;  so  that,  on  the  whole,  temporary 
sanctions  would  fail  to  express  truthfully  to  his  subjects,  either 
God’s  regard  for  his  own  honor  and  glory  ;  or  his  regard  for  the 
welfare  of  his  universe  ;  or  exhibit  his  infinite  preference  of  holi¬ 
ness  over  sin  ;  and  would  fail  also,  to  instruct  them  properly  in 
the  nature  and  value  of  obedience ;  and  are  therefore,  wholly 
inadmissible.  And  so  in  this  view,  endless  punishment  appears 
certain  and  inevitable. 

2.  Penalty  in  its  relations  to  Law. 

The  Law  of  God  is  comprehended  in  two  particulars — “Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself.”  (Luke  10:27.) 

We  notice  the  extent  of  its  application.  It  is  not  made  for 
this  world  merely.  No  moral  being  can  be  created,  who  will  not, 
with  the  first  dawn  of  responsibility,  come  under  its  operation. 
No  world  will  ever  be  peopled,  to  which  it  will  not  be  extended 
with  the  same  clearness  and  binding  authority  as  here  ;  and 
should  the  material  universe  go  on  expanding  eternally,  even  till 
the  suns  and  systems  of  immensity  now  in  being,  became  as 
nothing  in  comparison,  and  all  be  crowded  with  free,  intelligent 
mind,  this  one  Law  will  govern  all  and  protect  all,  and  so,  in  the 
extent  of  its  application,  be  as  unlimited  as  an  eternally  expand¬ 
ing  universe.  No  limit  therefore,  can  be  set  to  the  value  and  im¬ 
portance  of  God’s  Law,  seeing  it  is  all  that  protects  a  universe 


103 


expanding  throughout  the  endless  ages  and  binds  it  to  God  and 
holiness  and  happiness.  But  Law  can  only  be  sustained  by 
penalty.  Indeed  penalty  annexed  is  what  creates  law — that  is, 
makes  it  law  in  distinction  from  mere  advice;  and  what  then 
shall  be  the  limit  of  the  penalty  that  sustains  the  infinite  Law  of 
the  infinite  God,  and  whose  value  and  importance,  in  its  relations 
to  the  universe,  are  utterly  beyond  all  computation  or  measure¬ 
ment?  Plainly  the  penalty  that  sustains  such  a  law  must  corres¬ 
pond  with  it,  and  be  itself  limitless. 

3.  Penalty  in  its  relation  to  the  Atonement. 

To  those  who  accept  the  evangelical  system,  the  plan  of  Re¬ 
demption  through  Christ  Jesus  as  presented  in  the  scripture, 
clearly  indicates  an  infinite  provision  for  the  pardon  of  the  sin¬ 
ner  ;  and  the  necessary  inference  is  that,  in  the  harmonious  ad¬ 
ministration  of  the  Almighty,  there  must  be  an  infinite  penalty 
to  be  removed  by  it. 

For  example — In  the  scripture  representation  we  have  the 
Almighty  Savior,  “  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,”  “the  Maker  of  all 
worlds,”  “  One  with  the  Father,”  “  the  First  and  the  Last,”  “  of¬ 
fering  himself  through  the  Eternal  Spirit,”  “  bringing  in  ever¬ 
lasting  righteousness,”  “  proclaiming  an  everlasting  Gospel,” 
even  “  the  glorious  Gospel  of  the  Blessed  God And  in  Revela¬ 
tion,  John  “  heard  the  voice  of  many  angels  round  about  the 
throne,  and  the  number  of  them  was  ten  thousand  times  ten 
thousand  and  thousands  of  thousands,  saying  with  a  loud  voice, 
Worthy  is  the  Lamb  that  was  Slain.” 

Now  why  such  mighty  provisions  of  grace — why  the  suffering 
and  death  of  such  a  Mighty  Being— -why  such  an  infinite  sacrifice 
for  the  bestowment  of  mercy?  Only  because  the  obstacles  to 
pardon  are  such  as  could  in  no  way  be  removed  by  any  finite 
provision,  much  less  by  the  mere  sufferings  of  the  sinner.  How 
could  any  amount  of  temporarg  suffering  by  the  sinner  repair  the 
broken  law  of  the  Great  Jehovah,  balance  the  insult  to  his  majes¬ 
ty,  counteract  the  influence  of  a  wicked  example,  and  restore  the 
Divine  administration  generally  to  the  security  of  perfect  obe¬ 
dience?  Only  through  an  Infinite  Atonement  could  these  evils 
be  met,  and  God  be  able  safely  and  consistently  to  take  back  the 
sinner  to  his  forfeited  favor. 

And  all  this  was  fully  understood  and  recognized  by  the 
Almighty  when  setting  up  that  great  pillar  of  his  administration 
— salvation  for  the  sinful.  Nothing  but  a  limitless  provision 
could  balance,  in  his  estimation,  the  tremendous  guilt  of  trans¬ 
gression,  and  take  the  place  of  its  appropriate  penalty,  and  still 
be  in  harmony  with  the  entire  system.  And  therofore,  the  only 
possibility  of  pardon  is  revealed  in  the  Bible,  in  that  wonderful 
and  mysterious  plan  by  which  God  has  subjected  himself  to  suf- 


104 


fering  in  the  person  of  his  only  and  well  beloved  Son — “  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,”  and  thus  made  himself  “  an  offering  for  sin.” 
In  the  person  of  Jesus,  he  has  obeyed  his  own  most  righteous 
law  and  submitted  to  its  requirements  even  “  unto  death  and 
by  this  fearful  sacrifice,  so  held  it  up  before  his  subjects  in¬ 
violate — in  its  entire  sauctity  and  awful  majesty,  as  to  show  for 
it  a  greater  regard,  and  make  upon  the  universe  a  profounder  im¬ 
pression  of  its  sacredness,  than  if  he  had  laid  an  endless  penalty 
for  its  violation  upon  every  transgressor.  He  has  thus,  in  the 
lauguage  of  the  scripture,  “  magnified  the  Law  and  made  it 
honorable,”  so  that  it  remains  invested  with  its  full  dignity  and 
inviolability,  even  though  the  transgressor  of  it  receive  forgive¬ 
ness.  Therefore,  in  the  very  act  of  bestowing  pardon,  the  possi¬ 
bility  of  which  he  has  procured  at  an  infinite  sacrifice,  he  still 
asserts  his  perfect  liatrid  of  sin — that  he  has  “  no  pleasure  in  in¬ 
iquity,”  but  regards  it  with  unlimited  abhorrence. 

In  a  word,  he  has  by  this  grand  expedient,  so  fortified  the 
foundations  of  his  perfect  government,  that  he  can  safely  forgive 
— “  that  he  might  be  just  and  the  justifier  of  him  that  believeth  in 
'Jesus”  (Rom.  3:  26). 

Therefore,  by  this  infinite  sacrifice,  he  asserts  the  impossibil¬ 
ity  of  pardon  by  any  limited  and  inferior  provision,  and  that  this 
great  plan  of  mercy  is  a  substitute  for  otherwise  hopeless  and  un¬ 
ending  retribution — an  infinite  provision  for  the  remission  of  an 
infinite  penalty. 

On  the  other  hand,  only  assume  that  the  ruinous  effect  of  sin 
upon  the  individual  and  the  universe,  could  be  arrested  by  the 
finite  suffering  of  the  sinner,  and  no  reason  appears  for  an  Al¬ 
mighty  Savior.  In  that  case  sin  is  no  great  matter,  and  the  wrath 
of  God  is  no  great  matter,  for  there  would  still  be  for  the  sinner 
an  eternity  of  blessedness  beyond  these,  in  comparison  with  which 
any  amount  of  finite  penalty  would  at  length  become  absolutely 
nothing ;  and  the  sinner,  having  by  the  endurance  of  temporary 
penalty  delivered  himself  from  the  power  of  sin,  paid  his  own 
debts  and  well  and  truly  discharged  all  his  obligations,  could  then 
claim  an  eternity  of  happiness,  and  an  admission  to  the  entire 
confidence  and  fellowship  of  Jehovah.  (We  assume,  it  will  be 
noticed,  that  he  would  have  a  disposition  to  seek  the  companion¬ 
ship  of  God,  after  having  been  a  rebel  against  him  for  ages  ; 
though  how  he  could  have  it,  passes  all  finite  comprehension.  But 
we  will  assume  that  he  would  have  the  disposition.)  He  would 
then  take  his  stand  by  the  side  of  Gabriel  forever,  as  good  and 
holy  and  acceptable  as  he,  and  his  sins  and  iniquities  would  be 
remembered  no  more.  And  so  it  would  come  to  pass  that  sin, 
coupled  with  a  certain  amount  of  finite  suffering,  would  appear  to 
the  universe  to  be  just  as  much  for  the  glory  of  God,  and  the 
honor  of  his  name,  and  just  as  acceptable  to  him,  as  perfect  obed- 


105 


ience — a  principle  never  recognized  elsewhere,  and  under  the  per¬ 
fect  moral  government  of  God,  a  stupendous  falsehood,  and  sub¬ 
versive  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  his  administration. 

Therefore  also,  the  man  would,  in  that  case,  be  washed  clean 
in  the  blood  of  his  own  sufferings,  and  would  need  no  Savior,  and 
no  provisions  of  grace.  And  thus  from  this  low  and  insufficient 
stand-point  of  temporary  penalty,  the  Lord  Jesus  would  be  de¬ 
graded  to  a  mere  creature,  Redemption  have  no  adequate  meaning, 
the  great  Atonement  become  unnecessary,  and  “the  glorious 
gospel  of  the  blessed  God” — the  grand  scheme  of  salvation  for 
lost  sinners,  become  a  fable  and  a  myth,  and  the  Bible  that  reveals 
it,  of  no  more  authority  than  a  story-book.  All  this  utter  degrada¬ 
tion  of  the  Bible,  the  Gospel  and  the  Savior,  flows  logically  and 
necessarily  from  the  single  assumption  of  limited  and  temporary 
penalty. 

In  the  light  of  these  considerations,  Christian  men  at  least, 
will  see  that  this  view  subverts  the  very  foundations  of  Christian 
faith,  and  is  wholly  inadmissible,  and  that  they  are  shut  up  to  the 
only  remaining  assumption — that  the  appropriate  penalty  of  sin 
must  be  endless. 

The  fact  is  that  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  and  the 
doctrine  of  an  Atonement  through  an  Infinite  Savior,  must  stand 
or  fall  together  ;  so  that  those  who  reject  the  former,  like  the 
Unitarians  and  Universalists,  are  logically  consistent  when  they 
also  reject  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  and  reduce  him  to  the  level  of 
a  mere  created  being.  There  is  no  need  of  such  a  sacrifice  for  the 
remission  of  temporary  penalty.  From  the  Evangelical  view  of 
the  Atonement,  therefore,  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  as 
the  appropriate  and  necessary  penalty  for  transgression,  becomes 
certain  and  inevitable. 

4.  The  harmony  of  the  divine  administration  necessitates 
endless  penalty. 

It  appears  from  what  has  already  been  said  that  God  is  build¬ 
ing  a  vast  moral  edifice,  and,  as  a  wise  master-builder,  will  cer¬ 
tainly  so  construct  it  as  that  it  shall  be  perfectly  harmonious  in 
all  its  parts  and  proportions.  For  example,  tbe  reward  promised 
to  obedience  must  correspond  perfectly  with  the  mighty  meaning 
and  import  of  obedience  to  the  commands  of  the  Infinite  Jehovah. 
It  must  correspond,  too,  with  the  value  of  obedience  in  an  endless 
universe — a  universe  stretching  through  endless  ages,  and  doubt¬ 
less  eternally  expanding.  It  must  do  this.  The  government  would 
fail  to  be  a  perfect  one  if  it  did  not.  And  no  limited  reward  could 
adequately  express  the  obligation  of  obedience  to  such  a  being,  or 
the  value  of  obedience  in  such  a  universe. 

But  this  reasoning  applies  with  equal  closeness  to  the  op¬ 
posite  sanction  of  penalty.  This,  too,  must  have  its  exact  corres- 


106 


pondence  with  all  the  conditions  of  a  perfect  government,  an  end¬ 
less  universe,  and  an  Infinite  God.  If  obedience  be  a  measureless 
good,  so  is  disobedience  a  measureless  mischief  ;  and  as  nothing 
but  eternal  reward  will  correspond  with  the  value  of  the  one,  so 
nothing  but  endless  penalty  will  correspond  with  the  evil  of  the 
other  ;  and  as  sure,  therefore,  as  God  must  promise  the  one,  he 
must  also  threaten,  and  if  necessary  execute,  the  other. 

Furthermore,  everything  appertaining  to  this  moral  edifice 
is  limitless  and  endle  s.  The  God  that  builds  it  is  endless.  The 
system  itself  is  endless.  The  law  that  protects  it  is  endless.  The 
reward  of  obedience  is  endless.  The  great  atonement  by  Jesus 
Christ  is  unlimited  both  in  its  nature  and  relations.  And  how, 
then,  can  the  penalty  for  sin  be  limited  and  finite,  without  becom¬ 
ing  at  once  inharmonious  and  inconsistent  ?  The  fact  is,  the  four 
great  pillars  upon  which  the  divine  administration  rests — law,  re¬ 
ward,  penalty,  and  the  atonement — each  and  all  of  them,  stretch 
away  at  every  point  into  the  infinite,  all  towering  harmoniously 
together  in  their  infinite  and  majestic  proportions ;  and  if  you 
shrink  any  one  of  them  to  the  dimensions  of  the  finite,  you  make 
it  at  once  inharmonious,  inconsistent,  and  impossible. 

The  harmony ,  therefore,  of  the  vast  moral  edifice  which  God 
is  building  demands  endless  penalty  as  the  only  proper  sanction 
of  the  divine  law,  and  the  execution  of  it  at  last  upon  all  the  final¬ 
ly  impenitent  absolutely  essential  to  its  perfection. 

5.  The  endless  punishment  of  the  sinner  certain,  because 
7iothing  more  can  be  done  for  him. 

The  point  here  is  that  all  possible  efforts  are  expended  upon 
the  sinner  here  in  this  world  to  save  him,  so  that  nothing  car 
be  added  to  them  hereafter. 

Here  notice  first  the  formation,  progress  and  inveteracy  of 
sinful  habit. 

In  a  newly  created  mind,  coming  from  the  hand  of  God  in  its 
maturity,  as  we  suppose  Adam  and  the  angels  to  have  come,  we 
naturally  conclude  that  the  power  of  reason  and  conscience  would 
be  at  its  maximum,  and  the  love  of  independence  at  its  minimum; 
that  is,  that  it  would  have  as  strong  a  tendency  towards  good, 
and  as  weak  a  tendency  towards  evil,  as  is  possible  in  the  original 
constitution  of  a  being  “made  in  God’s  image.” 

If  now,  as  he  enters  on  probation,  he  would  follow  the  dic¬ 
tates  of  his  reason  and  his  conscience,  and  submit  to  the  require¬ 
ments  of  the  Almighty,  as  he  may  do  and  ought  to  do,  as  the 
Devil  might  have  done,  and  as  Adam  might  have  done,  and  as 
both  should  have  done,  then  would  reason  and  conscience  acquire 
additional  power  by  his  thus  yielding  to  their  control,  and  the  in¬ 
clination  to  independence  be  correspondingly  lessened,  and  he 
take  the  first  step  in  the  formation  of  a  holy  character,  and  a 
holy  habit.  Such  we  suppose  will  be  the  experience  of  newly 


107 

created  minds  in  future  ages.  Their  first  moral  act  under  a  fair 
trial,  will  be  one  of  obedience. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  he  refuses  submission,  and  follows 
his  love  of  independence,  as  did  Adam  and  the  Fallen  Angels, 
then  the  consequent  effect  on  the  balance  of  his  moral  faculties  is 
reversed.  Reason  and  conscience  lose  somewhat  of  their  original 
power ;  the  love  of  independent  action  is  increased  ;  the  inclina¬ 
tion  to  self-indulgence  is  intensified  ;  sin  becomes  more  and  more 
easy  of  commission,  and  centers  the  affections  upon  itself  with 
ever  increasing  tenacity ;  and  thus  this  first  wrong  step  lays  the 
foundation  of  a  sinful  character  and  a  sinful  habit. 

As  this  habit  progresses,  it  draws  everything  into  its  own 
dreadful  channel,  until  all  the  energies  of  soul  and  body  are  en¬ 
listed  in  the  work  of  sinful  self-indulgence.  The  drunkard,  the 
libertine  and  the  gambler  become  infatuated  in  their  wickedness, 
and  the  vice  they  love  becomes,  not  unfrequently,  an  absorbing 
and  controlling  passion  almost  like  a  demoniacal  possession. 

And  indeed,  any  form  of  sinning  may  grow  at  length  into  a 
sinful  habit ;  because  no  matter  what  sin  any  one  commits,  he 
commits  it  on  account  of  an  inclination  in  that  direction  ;  and 
the  inclination  grati  ied,  soon  becomes  imperious,  and  clamors  for 
indulgence  too  loudly  to  be  resisted  ;  and  the  man  finds  erelong 
his  supreme  delight  in  a  reckless  abandonment  to  that  inclination. 
This  is  true  of  any  and  every  form  of  sinning,  so  that  men  often 
become  fearfully  wicked  without  any  gross  and  sensual  manifesta¬ 
tions,  and  even  while  maintaining  a  faultless  exterior.  The  neg¬ 
lect  of  religious  duty,  forgetfulness  of  God,  immersion  in  worldly 
business  with  no  serious  care  for  the  soul,  a  prayerless  life,  a 
determination  to  follow  one’s  own  inclinations  irrespective  of  the 
claims  of  Christian  obligation,  and  the  instructions  of  the  Bible, 
result  in  as  complete  an  alienation  of  the  soul  from  God  as  the 
grosser  forms  of  wickedness,  and  produce  in  the  heart  habits  of 
sinning  equally  dreadful,  and  equally  difficult  to  be  broken  up. 

And  from  the  habit  of  sin  thus  formed,  it  is  evident  that  few 
are  delivered  in  this  world.  The  broad  road  to  destruction  is 
ever  thronged,  while  the  “  strait  gate”  of  repentance,  and  the 
“narrow  way”  of  confirmed  reformation  “few  find.”  (Matt.  7:13, 
14.)  The  mass  of  men  resist  all  God’s  efforts  for  their  salvation, 
cling  to  the  sin  he  warns  them  against,  reject  the  holiness  he  in¬ 
culcates,  “  despise  the  riches  of  his  goodness  and  forbearance  and 
long  suffering,”  neglect  the  duties  he  enjoins,  and  harden  them¬ 
selves  in  impenitence  until  the  earthly  probation  ends  and  death 
withdraws  them  from  human  sight.  Such  is  the  habit  of  sin;  as 
the  Scripture  terms  it,  the  “  Law  of  Sin  and  Death  ” — the  com¬ 
mencement,  progress  and  termination  of  the  sinful  life  on  earth. 

Here  let  it  be  noticed  that,  to  all  appearance,  this  habit  of 
sinning  grows  stronger  and  stronger  up  to  the  last  moment  of 


108 


departing  life,  and  until  the  grave  closes  over  the  sinner. 
Now  then  as  he  enters  on  the  career  of  the  coming  ages,  what 
shall  be  his  character  ?  Will  the  habits  of  thought  and  feeling  he 
has  formed  continue  with  him  still,  or  will  a  radical  change  be 
wrought  in  him  after  death,  so  that  at  some  time  during  his  eter¬ 
nal  existence,  he  will  become  fit  for  the  companionship  of  holy 
beings  ? 


DOCTRINE  OF  THE  RESTORATIONISTS. 

Here  come  in  Restorationists  who  claim  that  something  more 
can  be  done  for  the  sinner  in  the  future  world  to  break  up  sinful 
habit  than  has  been  done  in  this  world.  But  they  never  tell  us 
what  that  something  is.  Has  the  claim  any  foundation  ?  Let  us 
see: 

If  this  sinful  character  and  habit  be  ever  changed,  it  would 
seem  that  it  must  be  done  by  some  one  of  the  following  instru¬ 
mentalities  :  either  by  the  mere  event  of  death ;  or  through  the 
influence  of  suffering;  or  by  the  immediate  exertion  of  divine 
power  ;  or  by  some  new  application  of  the  atonement ;  or  by  a 
more  favorable  probation  ;  or  by  the  use  of  stronger  motives  to 
right  action. 

1.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  the  event  of  death. 

Those  who  assume  that  it  will  be,  assume  the  occasion  of 
sin  to  be  in  the  body ;  so  that  in  parting  with  the  body  the  man 
parts  with  the  occasion  of  sinning.  But  suppose  the  occasion  of 
sin  not  a  physical  one  at  all,  and  to  have  no  dependence  on  the 
body,  and  to  originate  solely  in  the  nature  of  the  mind  itself — in 
its  innate  love  of  independence  ;  and  that  the  union  of  the  soul 
with  the  body  has  only  tended  to  repress  the  activity  of  this  occa¬ 
sion,  and  to  hinder  its  out-workings,  mid  was  designed,  as  we 
have  shown  in  a  previous  connection,  only  to  work  against  sin. 
Then  the  event  of  death  will  only  sunder  the  bonds  that  have 
partially  restrained  sin,  and  intensify  the  love  of  independent  ac¬ 
tion  by  giving  to  it  a  freer  scope  and  a  wider  range,  and  thus  act 
only  for  the  aggravation  of  the  sinful  character. 

Also,  what  dependence  have  such  towering  passions  as  pride, 
envy,  ambition  and  revenge  upon  the  body1?  The  body  is  only 
now  and  then  the  instrument  of  their  gratification,  not  the  origin¬ 
ating  cause  of  them. 

Also,  what  has  the  body  to  do  with  the  sin  of  forgetting  God, 
or  of  rebellion  against  his  government  or  the  rejection  of  the 
Savior?  To  all  appearance  nothing  ;  and  the  event  of  death,  by 
delivering  the  soul  from  the  hindrances  and  obstructions  of  mor¬ 
tality  and  giving  the  mental  powers  a  fuller  and  freer  play,  will, 
to  all  appearance,  only  result  in  a  freer  exercise  of  all  these  sinful 


109 


tendencies,  and  bring  the  soul  into  a  more  distinct  and  conscious 
collision  with  the  Almighty,  and  thus  only  aggravate  instead  of 
reforming  sinful  character. 

2.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  suffering. 

Suffering  alone  has  no  power  to  reform  character,  and  at 
best  only  leads  the  sinner  to  give  up  the  external  act  of  sin  which 
causes  the  suffering,  the  character  at  the  bottom  remaining  essen¬ 
tially  unchanged.  It  produces  no  love  of  holiness,  and  no  hatred 
of  sin  for  its  own  sake.  In  the  case  of  the  few  who  become  Chris¬ 
tians,  suffering  appears  first  to  arrest  the  man  in  his  career  of 
thoughtlessness  and  compel  reflection;  and  then  the  Divine 
Spirit  of  God,  gently  knocking  at  the  door  of  the  heart,  in  a  few 
iu stances  obtains  admittance.  The  man  yields  to  the  Spirit’s  in¬ 
fluence,  and  submits  to  God,  and  is  said  to  be  “born  of  the  Spirit.’' 
But  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases  the  door  is  kept  persistently 
closed  against  his  gentle  knockings.  The  suffering  is  endured 
without  submission.  The  man  resists  the  Spirit,  and  refuses  to 
yield  ;  and  the  result  is  only  increased  hardness  and  impenitence. 
Suffering  brought  Pharaoh  to  temporary  submission  and  external 
obedience,  but  it  effected  no  true  reformation  of  character,  and 
produced  no  love  to  God.  And  any  amount  of  mere  suffering  would 
only  have  hardened  ;  and  any  degree  of  external  obedience,  would 
have  been  only  the  obedience  of  a  sullen,  unhumbled  soul,  in 
which  there  was  not  a  spark  of  true  penitence  and  affectionate 
submission.  So  any  kind  or  amount  of  reformation  brought  about 
by  mere  suffering,  never  would  amount  to  true  holiness.  There 
would  be  no  positive  love  engendered  for  the  Almighty,  and  no 
complacency  in  his  government,  and  no  delight  in  his  companion¬ 
ship  ;  and  the  man  would  only  be  possibly  deterred  from  the  ex¬ 
ternal  act  of  sin  by  the  fear  of  consequences ;  and  could  he  be 
sure  at  any  time  of  escaping  these,  he  would  return  to  it  again 
like  “  the  dog  to  his  vomit,  or  the  sow  that  was  washed  to  her 
wallowing  in  the  mire.”  (2  Pet.  2:  21.) 

Moreover,  where  the  suffering  is  seen  to  result  directly  from 
the  sinful  indulgence,  it  does  not  at  all  lead  the  sufferer  to  give 
up  the  sin  ;  but  in  despite  of  this,  he  clings  to  the  indulgence 
with  ever  increasing  tenacity.  For  example,  take  those  forms  of 
sinful  indulgence  which  are  followed  by  the  most  dreadful  suffer¬ 
ings  sin  ever  inflicts  in  this  world — intemperance  and  licentious¬ 
ness.  The  drunkard’s  life  is  often  one  of  almost  incessant  torment 
— torment  of  body  and  torment  of  mind.  He  is  crushed  by  pov¬ 
erty,  wretchedness  and  remorse.  His  body  is  bloated  with  dis¬ 
ease,  and  his  nerves  thrill  with  pain.  He  suffers  the  horrors  of 
delirium  tremens.  His  ruined  family  before  him,  rend  his  soul 
with  anguish.  Yet,  in  defiance  of  all  this,  he  clings  to  the  sinful 
habit  with  the  very  strength  of  desperation,  and  wades  through 


110 


all  the  accumulated  and  accumulating  horrors  of  his  experience  to 
the  very  last — till  the  grave  opens  for  him,  and  hides  his  prema¬ 
ture  rottenness  from  human  sight. 

The  record  of  licentiousness  is  no  less  appalling.  Racks  and 
dungeons  and  flames  are  not  more  terrible  than  are  the  sufferings 
which  irregular  passion  often  inflicts,  and  yet  in  spite  of  all,  the 
wretched  victims  hug  their  habits  of  beastly  impurity  with  steadily 
increasing  frenzy.  The  further  they  go,  and  the  more  they  suffer, 
the  more  energetically  do  they  choose  their  sin  and  suffering. 
They  cannot  be  induced  to  relinquish  it ;  and  the  “  Ethiopian’s 
skin,”  and  the  “leopard's  spot,”  are  not  apparently  more  unchang- 
able. 

So  the  gambler  and  the  miser  become  so  infatuated  in  their 
wickedness  as  to  be  utterly  reckless  of  consequences.  No  matter 
how  terrible  the  consequent  suffering  and  privation,  these  have 
not  the  least  influence  to  wean  them  from  the  vice,  and  they  cling 
to  it  still  with  undiminished  intensity. 

A  fearful  illustration  of  the  powerlessness  of  suffering  to  im¬ 
prove  chcracter,  occurred  some  years  ago  in  the  State  of  Ohio,  in 
the  town  of  P.  in  case  of  a  profane  and  intemperate  man  by  the 
name  of  J — B — .  The  writer  received  the  following  account  from 
one  who  repeatedly  watched  with  him  in  his  sickness.  He  was 
a  man  of  powerful  frame  and  vigorous  constitution,  but  by  his 
bad  habits,  had  brought  upon  himself  frequent  and  dreadful  suf¬ 
ferings  ;  at  one  time,  while  in  a  state  of  intoxication,  falling  from 
a  building,  and  bruising  and  mangling  his  body  in  a  shocking  man¬ 
ner,  which  subjected  him  to  a  long  confinement  and  terrible  agon¬ 
ies,  the  flesh  in  some  places  sloughing  from  his  bones.  Subse¬ 
quently,  in  a  fit  of  intoxication,  he  was  lost  in  a  wood,  and  when 
found  was  insensible,  which  resulted  in  a  long  and  painful  illness. 
And  now  the  point  to  be  specially  noticed  is,  that  all  these  com¬ 
plicated  sufferings,  coming  on  him  too  as  the  direct,  natural  con¬ 
sequence  of  his  sins,  as  direct  as  natural  consequence  can  ever 
follow  sin  in  the  future  world,  had  yet  no  apparent  power  to  re¬ 
form  or  even  soften.  Indeed  the  only  effect  apparently  was  to 
confirm  him  still  more  and  more  in  his  iniquitous  conduct.  But 
this  was  not  the  only  result.  He  grew  correspondingly  in  hatred 
against  God  whom  he  regarded  as  inflicting  these  sufferings ;  for 
his  bad  habits  brought  upon  him  at  length  a  complication  of  dis¬ 
orders  and  with  them  the  most  agonizing  torments,  winch  roused 
all  the  malignity  of  his  nature.  He  felt  that  he  was  in  the  hand 
of  God,  and  that  what  he  endured  was  his  visitation  upon  him ; 
but  this,  instead  of  producing  any  thing  like  penitence  and  sub¬ 
mission,  only  awakened  still  more  the  hatred  and  opposition  of 
his  heart,  and  like  the  ones  mentioned  in  Revelation,  he  could  only 
“  curse”  the  Almighty.  His  oaths  and  blasphemies  of  God  were 
dreadful.  In  the  very  midst  of  his  agonies,  he  would  throw  up 


Ill 


his  clenched  fists  in  an  attitude  of  defiance,  and  calling  on  the 
Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  each  by  name,  heap  upon 
them  the  most  opprobrious  epithets,  and  curse  and  revile  them  as 
the  author  of  his  sufferings,  and  dare  them,  severally  and  collect¬ 
ively,  to  do  their  worst  upon  him.  And  this  tirade  of  execration 
and  blasphemy  of  the  Almighty — these  violent  and  even  frantic 
expressions  of  hatred  and  contempt,  would  go  on  for  hours,  until 
his  strength  was  utterly  exhausted. 

The  point  to  be  noticed  here  is,  that  suffering  only  intensified 
his  hatred  of  the  Almighty  ;  and  to  all  appearance  this  will  be 
its  only  influence  in  the  future  world.  At  least  this  accords  with 
our  observation  of  men.  Here  in  this  world,  suffering  alone  has 
no  apparent  tendency  even  to  change  character  for  the  better. 
Indeed,  it  far  oftener  hardens  then  softens.  Neither  bodily  an¬ 
guish,  nor  the  pangs  of  bereavement,  nor  the  emptiness  of  disap¬ 
pointment,  nor  the  torments  of  remorse,  nor  all  combined,  lead 
men  to  love  and  serve  God :  and  even  with  the  vast  majority  of 
men  only  incite  to  additional  complaint  and  rebellion.  This  ac¬ 
cords  with  the  Bible.  Rev.  9:  20,  21  reads,  “And  the  rest  of  the 
men  which  were  not  killed  by  these  plagues  yet  repented  7iot  of 
the  works  of  their  hands:  Neither  repented  they  of  their  murders, 
nor  of  their  fornication,  nor  of  their  thefts.” 

Also,  Rev.  16  :  8-11.  “  And  men  were  scorched  with  great 

heat  and  blasphemed  the  name  of  God  which  hath  power  over 
these  plagues  :  and  they  repented  not  to  give  him  glory.  And 
they  gnawed  their  tongues  for  pain,  and  blasphemed  the  God  of 
heaven  because  of  their  pains  and  their  sores,  and  repented 
7iot  of  their  deeds.” 

But,  it  is  asked,  does  not  the  parent  chastise  his  child,  and 
so  induce  submission ;  and  may  not  God,  as  the  heavenly  Parent, 
so  chatise  his  children,  in  the  future  world,  as  to  secure  a  corres¬ 
ponding  result?  Answer:  The  chatisement  of  the  child  is  effi¬ 
cient  and  valuable  only  in  childhood,  and  while  the  resistance  to 
authority  has  almost  no  characteristic  of  intelligent  rebellion. 
With  increasing  y&ars,  and  a  corresponding  intelligence  in  trans¬ 
gression,  punishment,  as  a  means  of  personal  benefit,  becomes 
useless,  and  the  parent  is  compelled  to  relinquish  it.  Reason  only 
can  avail  then.  Force  has  no  power  to  subdue  an  intelligent  will. 
It  may  compel  external  obedience,  but  cannot  reach  the  submis¬ 
sion  of  the  heart,  and  true  reformation  of  the  character. 

And  yet  multitudes  assume  that  suffermg  is  to  be  the  grand 
panacea  in  the  future  world  for  the  reformation  of  character.  But 
why  any  more  efficacious  there  than  here  ?  And  if  it  fails  here, 
why  not  there  ?  The  principles  of  moral  government  cannot 
change ;  the  laws  of  mind  cannot  change  ;  and  how,  then,  can  the 
suffering  which  was  powerless  here  to  renovate  character  become 
omnipotent  there  f  This  fact  should  be  remembered  that  though 


112 


the  world  is  filled  with  suffering,  and  all  are  made,  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent,  to  feel  the  bitter  consequences  of  sin,  few  are  Jed  by 
them  to  become  humble,  prayerful  and  holy,  and  few  are  drawn 
by  them  any  nearer  to  God  either  in  character  or  affection. 

The  fact  is,  the  reformation  of  character  by  mere  suffering  is 
impossible,  not  merely  in  this  world,  but  anywhere  in  God’s  univ¬ 
erse.  The  very  nature  of  mind  forbids  it. 

Moreover,  let  it  be  noticed  that  in  securing  the  reformation 
of  a  sinner,  here  in  this  world,  suffering  is  only  a  single  element 
employed.  To  lead  the  sinner  to  give  up  his  sinfulness  and  sub¬ 
mit  to  God,  requires  goodness  with  severity,  and  that,  too,  in  the 
most  careful  combination.  It  requires  kindness  to  be  mingled 
with  chatisement,  making  “  the  way  of  the  transgressor  hard”  on 
the  one  hand,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  “enduring  him  with 
patience  and  long-suffering”  on  the  other — just  that  nice  and  del¬ 
icate  adjustment  of  reformatory  influences  to  his  peculiar  nature 
and  disposition,  which  especially  characterizes  his  earthly  proba¬ 
tion. 

Also,  there  is  needed  in  addition  to  this,  and  in  connection 
with  it,  the  infinite  influences  of  God’s  Holy  Spirit,  exerted  in 
just  that  way  and  to  just  that  extent  which  shall  induce  and  per¬ 
suade  to  the  utmost  without,  in  the  least  degree,  interfering  with 
free  agency.  The  man  must  be  induced  to  “  work  out  his  own 
salvation”  with  absolute  freedom,  while  at  the  same  time  “  God 
works  in  him”  by  his  Holy  Spirit.  And  this  entire  combination 
of  goodness  and  severity  and  the  Spirit’s  influences  must  be  set 
in  operation  and  kept  in  operation  with  all  the  energy  and  intensity, 
and  at  the  same  time  with  all  the  carefulness,  which  the  God  of 
heaven  can  command, in  order  to  save  a  single  sinner;  and  even  then 
the  declaration  is  that  “  the  righteous  are  scarcely  saved,”  coupled 
also  with  that  fearful  question  “  where,”  in  that  case,  “  shall  the  un¬ 
godly  and  the  sinner  appear?”  And  now  it  is  just  this  nice  ad¬ 
justment,  this  delicate  combination  of  reformatory  influences,  and 
this  infinite  intensity  of  operation  on  the  part  of  the  Divine  Spirit, 
which  goes  to  make  up  this  earthly  probation  ;  And  if  this  mighty 
combhiation  of  renovating  influences  which  God  tries  in  this  world 
has  utterly  failed  of  its  object,  why  should  it  be  assumed  that 
mere  suffering  hereafter  will  effect  reformation? 

The  assumption  therefore,  that  the  mere  suffering  which  fol¬ 
lows  sin  in  another  state  of  being,  will  break  up  sinful  habit,  con¬ 
tradicts  all  our  observation  here  in  this  world.  Here  men  evident¬ 
ly  resist  it  all,  and  force  their  headlong  and  headstrong  way  to 
still  deeper  depths  in  sin,  and  to  an  ever  increasing  distance  from 
God  and  holiness.  And  how  feeble  must  be  the  influence  of  mere 
suffering  in  the  future  state  to  induce  them  to  return  to  God,  when 
they  have  resisted,  through  a  whole  life-time,  the  steady  pressure 
of  such  a  probation. 


•N 


113 


3.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  the  exertion  of  divine 
power. 

The  supposition  of  the  divine  creation  of  holiness  by  power 
is  absurd  and  impossible.  No  man  can  make  either  a  good  or  bad 
character  for  himself  but  himself.  For  a  good  character  is  made 
up  of  love  and  obedience  to  God,  and  the  exercise  of  faith  and  re¬ 
pentance.  But  obedience  and  love  and  repentance  and  faith  are 
not  the  result  of  power.  A  good  or  bad  character,  a  hard  or 
tender  heart,  cannot  be  created  by  influences  exerted  upon  the 
soul  from  without  itself.  As  Dr.  Channing  forcibly  remarks — 
“  To  suppose  moral  goodness  breathed  from  abroad  into  the  guilty 
soul,  just  as  health  may  be  imparted  to  a  sick  body,  is  to  over¬ 
look  the  distinction  between  corporeal  and  intellectual  natures, 
and  to  degrade  a  free  being  into  a  machine.”  The  only  possible 
way  in  which  a  heart  can  be  hardened,  is  by  its  own  voluntary 
resistance  to  truth  and  motives;  also  the  only  possible  way  in  which 
it  can  be  softened,  and  made  humble  and  holy,  is  by  its  own  volun¬ 
tary  yielding  to  truth  and  motives  ;  so  that  no  one  can  make 
either  a  good  or  bad  character  for  himself  but  himself-,  and  there¬ 
fore,  a  good  character  cannot  result  from  the  exertion  of  power 
by  another,  though  exerted  to  the  extent  of  omnipotence.  Even 
God  cannot  love  for  us,  nor  choose  for  us,  nor  exercise  faith  for 
us,  nor  do  our  work  of  repentance.  This  is  our  work  and  we 
alone  can  do  it. 

And  to  the  doing  of  this  personal  work,  God  can  only  lead  us 
and  induce  us  by  moral  considerations.  Motives  alone  can  move 
the  soul  to  right  action,  and  to  a  change  of  character.  But  all 
motives  to  this  end,  possible  or  conceivable,  are  expended  upon 
us  here  in  this  world.  Heaven,  Hell  and  Calvary  are  set  before 
us,  involving  infinite  appeals  to  every  side  of  our  nature  which  can 
be  reached  b}r  motive,  and  God’s  Infinite  Spirit  goes  with  and 
energizes  all  to  the  full  extent  that  he  wisely  and  properly  can ; 
so  that  to  induce  a  man  to  form  a  holy  character  is  the  persistent 
effort  of  God  during  his  earthly  probation.  He  is  ever  exerting 
in  his  behalf  all  the  power  that  he  wisely  can.  He  leaves  nothing 
unattempted  ;  with  infinite  patience,  and  infinite  love,  and  un¬ 
speakable  yearnings  he  waits  upon  him,  and  works  over  him  by 
his  Word,  Providence  and  Spirit  to  turn  him  from  his  evil  way  ; 
declaring  his  unwillingness  that  he  should  perish,  and  exclaiming 
in  the  anguish  of  his  heart,  at  his  desperation  in  wickedness, 
“How  shall  I  give  thee  up;  my  heart  is  turned  within  me,  my 
repentings  are  kindled  together.”  (Hos.  11 :  8.) 

And  no  exertions  of  the  Almighty  elsewhere  can  surpass  his 
mighty  workings  for  human  salvation  here  on  earth ;  and  if  these 
have  failed,  the  case  is  hopeless.  The  man  would  not  be  saved  • 

6 


114  . 

and  as  lie  sinks  down  to  death,  the  language  of  God  over  him  will 
be — “  What  could  have  been  done  more  for  thy  salvation  that  I 
have  not  done.”  * 

Reformation,  therefore,  by  the  mere  exertion  of  'power  is  im¬ 
possible  either  in  this  world  or  the  next. 

4.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  some  new  application  of 
atonement. 

Christ  can  be  no  better  Saviour  in  the  future  world  than  here; 
for  he  is  “  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever .”  (Heb. 
12:8.) 

He  can  never  die  again  •  for  says  the  apostle  in  Romans  6:9, 
“  Christ  being  raised  from  the  dead,  dieth  no  more /  death  hath  no 
more  dominion  over  him.” 

Neither  can  his  atoning  sacrifice  have  any  greater  efficacy 
there  than  here;  for  here  it  “  cleanses  forom  all  sin;  ”  and  he  is 
“able  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come  unto  God  by  him.” 
(1  John  1:7;  Heb.  7:25.) 

Is  it  said  that  in  the  future  world  the  sinner  will  be  less  dis¬ 
posed  to  reject  him?  But  why?  He  clearly  understands  now  that 
Christ  died  in  his  behalf — as  clearly  as  language  can  express  it; 
and  the  fact  can  never  be  stated  any  more  clearly. 

The  invitations  of  the  gospel  are  as  full,  free,  and  hearty  here 
as  they  ever  can  be  elsewhere. 

All  of  God’s  providential  dealings  are  aimed  at  inducing  men 
to  accept  them,  and  we  know  of  no  new  and  improved  dealings 
which  could  be  devised,  and  of  nothing  that  could  increase  the 
efficacy  of  those  already  employed. 

Also,  the  blessings  promised  on  condition  of  accepting  him 
cannot  be  multiplied  in  number,  nor  increased  in  value  and  attract¬ 
iveness  ;  nor  can  the  warnings  against  rejecting  him  be  any  more 
fearful  than  they  are. 

Notice,  furthermore,  that  the  very  object  of  his  mission  was 
to  rescue  men  from  sin.  He  says  of  himsulf  (Luke  19:10):  “The 
Son  of  man  is  come  to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost.”  He 
came  on  purpose  for  this.  He  came  on  purpose  to  reform  men. 
He  suffered  and  died  for  this.  Now  is  it  supposable  that  he 

“Should  it  be  asked  why  God  expends  so  much  effort  for  the  salvation 
of  those  who  fie  foreknows  will  resist  it  all,  and  be  finally  lost,  one  an¬ 
swer  is — Tfiat  fie  may  vindicate  his  character  for  sincerity  and  honesty 
before  the  assembled  universe  at  last.  In  the  view  we  are  taking,  his 
dealings  with  every  man  are  to  pass  into  history,  and  the  illustration  of 
his  character  and  perfections  in  his  treatment  of  men  in  the  way  of  judg¬ 
ment  and  mercy  here  in  this  world,  is  to  be  the  grand  influence  which  is 
to  bind  the  universe  in  obedience  to  him  forever  ;  and  it  is  essential,  there¬ 
fore,  that  in  passing  the  sentence  of  final  condemnation  upon  ungodly 
men,  his  effort  for  their  salvation  should  appear  to  have  been  thorough 
and  complete,  even  so  that  nothing  was  left  undone  to  secure  it. 


115 


would  omit  any  instrumentality  which  might  be  made  effective 
for  this?  Why  should  he?  If  his  mission  was  to  reform  and  save, 
why  should  he  prosecute  it  with  half-heartedness,  and  leave  out 
instrumentalities  which  might  be  successfully  employed?  Why 
omit  anything  ?  The  supposition  that  he  did  would  be  inexpli¬ 
cable.  It  would  convict  him  of  unfaithfulness  to  his  mission — to 
the  trust  reposed  in  him — to  the  work  God  sent  him  to  do. 

Therefore  we  are  bound  to  believe,  on  common  sense  princi¬ 
ples,  that  when  he  came  on  purpose  to  save  sinners,  he  did  the 
best  that  could  be  done.  We  should  expect  this  from  an  ordinary 
man  of  ordinary  honesty  and  faithfulness;  how  much  more  from 
the  infinite  Saviour!  But  if  the  best  is  done  on  earth,  then  noth¬ 
ing  remains  that  he  can  en^loy  any  more  successfully  hereafter. 

5.  Sinful  character  not  changed  by  a  more  favorable  pro¬ 
bation. 

The  position  of  men  in  this  world  is  often  regarded  as  being 
encumbered  with  frightful  obstacles  to  right  living  and  acting — 
obstacles,  too,  which  they  themselves  had  no  hand  in  forming, and 
for  which  they  are  in  no  way  responsible.  For  example: 

Overlooking  the  fact  that  the  occasion  of  sin  is  found  in  the 
necessary  nature  of  free. agency,  men  have  undertaken  to  account 
for  the  certainty  and  universality  of  human  sinfulness  by  tracing 
it  to  the  external  conditions  of  human  probation;  for  instance,  to 
the  temptation  of  malignant  beings,  or  the  connection  of  the  soul 
wfith  a  material  body,  or  to  the  conditions  of  infancy,  or  to  the 
parental  relation;  thus  throwing  the  responsibility  for  the  sinful¬ 
ness  of  men  off  from  them,  and  on  to  these  particular  arrange¬ 
ments  of  which  God  is  represented  as  being  the  responsible 
author.  Manifestly,  those  who  entertain  such  views  cannot  see 
how'  it  is  possible  that  men  have  in  this  word  and  this  life  a  fair 
probation.* 

But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  entire  conditions  of  human  pro¬ 
bation  are  in  the  interest  of  holiness.  It  was  shown  in  the  chap¬ 
ter  on  Man,  Part  I,  that  God  has  taxed  the  very  energies  of  his 
omnipotence  to  fill  this  world  with  all  inducements  to  right  living 
and  acting,  even  till  the  entire  resources  of  Nature,  Providence 

*  Some,  however,  like  Stuart,  undertake  to  meet  this  difficulty  by  as¬ 
suming  that  God  has  introduced  the  Atonement  as  a  scheme  of  ‘  ‘  com¬ 
pensation ”  to  make  up  for  these  previously  inflicted  evils;  and  so,  on  the 
whole ,  men  do  have,  in  this  world  and  this  life,  a  fair  probation.  But  in 
this  view,  God  is  under  obligation  to  furnish  the  Atonement;  because 
otherwise  men  would  not  have  a  fair  probation;  and  how  then  is  the 
atonement  a  “  free  gift,'1'1  as  the  Apostle  terms  it  in  Rom.  5:15 — a  “  dorea 
en  chariti ,”  and  which  God  was  under  no  sort  of  obligation  to  men  to 
bestow.  This  robs  the  atonement  of  its  most  distinguishing  characteristic 
as  being  a  purely  gracious  dispensation. 


116 


and  Grace  were  exhausted  in  this  direction ;  so  that  men  do  have 
in  this  world  the  best  probation  they  can  have. 

To  this  chapter  the  reader  is  referred  for  proof  that  men  can 
have  no  more  favorable  probation  elsewhere  than  they  have  in 
this  world. 

6.  Sinful  character  is  not  changed  by  the  use  of  stronger 
motives. 

The  threefold  instrumentality  which  God  is  using  with  the 
most  effective  power  for  human  salvation  is  the  appeal  to  fear 
and  affection,  accompanied  by  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Nothing  in  the  future  world  can  exceed  this  in  effectiveness,  for 
it  is  the  most  effective  which  the  universe  can  furnish. 

1.  Take  the  appeal  to  affection.  Is  there  any  better  kind  of 
effort  or  instrumentality  than  this  ?  anything  more  powerful  or 
efficient — better  adapted  to  lead  a  man  to  give  up  sin  and  choose 
holiness?  If  so,  what?  We  know  of  none.  The  Restorationist 
knows  of  none.  And  this  is  the  exact  appeal  which  God  is  now 
making  in  the  whole  grand  scheme  of  redemption;  and  he  is  seek¬ 
ing  in  this  way  to  give  expression  to  his  own  infinite  affection 
for  this  sinful  world,  in  order  to  win  its  love  in  return. 

Notice  what  he  says  in  John  3:16:  “  God  so  loved  the  world, 
that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life.”  Also,  1  John 
4:10:  “  Herein  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved 

us,  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins.” 

Notice  again  that  the  Saviour  himself  is  declared  to  have 
come  on  this  errand  of  mercy  to  the  sinful  from  affection — 
“  Christ  also  hath  loved  us,  and  hath  given  himself  for  us.”  (Eph. 
5:2.)  And  the  apostle,  in  Ephesians  3:19,  speaks  of  “  the  love  of 
Christ  which  passeth  knowledge .” 

Notice  again  that  the  Infinite  Spirit  of  God  is  ever  working 
with  tenderness  and  love  in  human  souls  ;  and  thus  the  Father, 
the  Son,  the  Holy  Spirit,  are  pouring  out  one  mighty  stream  of 
affection  on  this  guilty  world  in  order  to  melt  it  in  contrition 
and  love. 

Now,  the  point  is  that  there  is  no  other  kind  of  influence  or 
instrumentality  for  drawing  moral  beings  to  God  superior  to  this. 
Even  the  wnole  universe  cannot  furnish  an  influence  equal  to  it. 
It  is  absolutely  the  mightiest  power  in  existence  to  move  a  moral 
being  to  right  action.  Does  the  Restorationist  deny  this?  Then 
let  him  mention  one  more  powerful.  He  cannot.  And  therefore 
the  conclusion  is  inevitable,  and  he  should  so  receive  it,  that  the 
Divine  resources  in  respect  to  the  kind  of  influence  that  will  draw 
men  in  loving  obedience  to  God  are  utterly  exhausted.  When 
God  has  shown  his  own  loving  heart  to  men  in  the  gift  of  his  Son, 
and  Jesus  has  shown  his  own  infinite  affection  by  dying  for  them, 


117 


and  the  Holy  Spirit  has  done  his  tender,  loving  work  upon  their 
hearts  in  his  gracious  strivings,  no  other  influence  can  transcend 
this  as  a  moving  power  upon  men  for  their  reformation  and  sal¬ 
vation. 

Now,  secondly,  how  about  the  degree  of  this  affection?  It 
has  been  shown  that  there  is  no  better  kind  of  influence  than  this; 
but  possibly  it  is  lacking  in  degree.  There  may  have  been  here  in 
this  world  a  half-heartedness  about  it,  and  some  improvement  in 
this  respect  may  be  possible  hereafter;  so  that  if  this  affection 
should  only  be  modified  in  degree ,  the  reformation  of  the  sinner 
in  the  future  world  would  certainly  follow  it.  How  is  this?  Here 
notice  that  in  providing  this  scheme  of  redemption  for  fallen  man 
the  affection  of  the  Almighty  has  had  its  mightiest  possible  exer¬ 
cise  and  expression.  He  gave  his  own  Son  to  sufferings  and  death, 
even  the  agony  of  the  crucifixion.  Yea,  more,  his  “well-beloved 
Son” — the  very  dearest  object  of  affection  which  he  had  to  give. 
Yea,  more,  his  only  Son — no  other  one  to  give.  And  therefore 
no  greater  proof  or  expression  of  affection  is  possibie — nothing 
beyond  it.  It  was  the  expression  of  infinite  affection,  in  the  very 
nature  of  the  case  impossible  to  be  increased  in  intensity.  The 
point  is  that  God  has  loved  this  sinful  world  with  the  whole 
strength  of  his  infinite  nature,  even  all  he  could  love  it.  He  has 
exhausted  himself — his  own  infinite  self — in  his  love  for  men, 
and  there  is  no  possible  depth  or  strength  of  affection  beyond  it. 

How,  in  the  next  place,  about  the  manifestation  of  this  affec¬ 
tion?  Perhaps  there  has  been  something  lacking  at  this  point,  so 
that  the  expressiveness  of  manifestation  can  be  hereafter  in  some 
way  increased,  and  so  wicked  men  be  led  by  it  to  give  up  sin  in 
the  future  world.  How  is  this? 

Here  notice  the  pains  God  was  at  in  the  work  of  preparation 
to  make  this  manifestation  the  most  influential  possible.  All  the 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  for  hundreds  of  years  were  made 
to  point  forward  to  Christ  as  the  great  central  figure  of  the 
future.  Almost  the  entire  Mosaic  ritual  was  designed  to  prefig¬ 
ure  him,  and  to  explain  to  men  the  nature  and  object  of  his  mis¬ 
sion.  The  New  Testament  is  almost  entirely  taken  up  with  the 
unfolding  of  his  character  and  the  record  of  his  ministry.  What 
is  there  lacking  at  this  point? 

Could  his  mission  to  the  world  be  any  more  clearly  stated 
than  it  is  ?  Says  Christ  himself  (Luke  19:  10) :  “  The  Son  of  man 
is  come  to  seek  and  to  save  that  ivhich  was  lost,”  And  the  apos¬ 
tle  speaks  of  it  in  1  Timothy  1 :  15,  thus :  “  This  is  a  faithful  say¬ 
ing,  and  worthy  of  all  acceptation,  that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the 
world  to  save  sinners .”  Can  it  be  any  more  clearly  stated? 

Could  his  character  be  portrayed  in  more  attractive  and  win¬ 
ning  traits  than  it  is?  He  is  “  meek  and  lowly  in  heart,”  the  Friend 
of  sinners,  comforting  the  mourners,  weeping  with  the  sorrowful, 


118 


and  even  in  his  last  agony  praying  for  his  murderers.  The  pro¬ 
phet  Isaiah, in  that  wonderful  fifty-third  chapter,  looking  forward 
in  vision,  thus  describes  him  as  he  would  be  :  “A  man  of  sorrows, 
and  acquainted  with  grief;  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  and 
bruised  for  our  iniquities  ;  ”  oppressed  and  afflicted,  yet  opening 
not  his  mouth ;  “  brought  as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,  and  as  a 
sheep  before  her  shearers  is  dumb,  so  he  openeth  not  his  mouth.” 
And  see,  too,  his  infinite  tenderness  in  Isaiah  42  :  3,  quoted  also 
in  Matthew  12 :  20 :  “A  bruised  reed  shall  he  not  break,  and 
smoking  flax  shall  he  not  quench.”  Can  a  more  lovely  and  at¬ 
tractive  character  be  portrayed? 

Could  any  mightier  works  attest  his  divine  mission  than  those 
which  he  wrought — raising  the  dead,  cleansing  the  lepers,  stilling 
the  tempest  with  a  word,  and  feeding  the  thousands  in  the  wilder¬ 
ness  with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes?  We  can  think  of  none. 

Could  his  teachings  and  instructions  be  improved  ?  Was  any 
truth  left  unsaid  which  would  have  a  tendency  to  save  men  ?  Were 
any  necessary  directions  omitted?  Were  any  disclosures  of  the 
past,  the  present,  or  the  future  withheld  which  would  have  been 
better  calculated  to  move  men  to  repentance  and  reformation  ? 
Was  there  any  lack  of  faithfulness  in  warning,  tenderness  in  plead¬ 
ing,  or  earnestness  in  persuasion?  Was  there  any  lack  of  kind¬ 
ness  and  love  and  compassion  in  any  or  all  the  manifestations  of 
his  character,  his  teachings,  or  his  works?  But  one  answer  can 
be  given  to  these  questions  by  any  one  familiar  with  the  New 
Testament.  No  one  is  able  to  suggest  the  least  addition  or  change 
of  any  kind  which  would  increase  the  effectiveness  of  his  mission. 
It  was  dictated  by  tender  love,  by  infinite  affection  for  lost  sinners ; 
and  why  should  not  that  affection  have  had  the  fullest  expression, 
and  have  always  worked  out  itself  to  the  utmost?  Why  should 
any  change  be  possible,  and  at  the  same  time  advantageous  ?  He 
came  “to  seek  and  to  save  ;”  came  on  purpose  for  this ;  and  why 
should  any  thing  have  been  omitted  calculated  to  make  his  mis¬ 
sion  more  successful  ?  The  supposition  that  he  left  any  thing  un¬ 
attempted  in  so  important  a  work  would  convict  the  great  Re¬ 
deemer  of  carelessness  or  incompetence,  and  this  would  be  akin 
to  blasphemy.  No;  the  Lord  Jesus,  when  on  earth,  did  the  best 
that  could  be  done  to  rescue  men  from  perdition,  and  has  been 
doing  it  ever  since :  and  nothing  can  be  added  to  those  efforts  in 
the  future  world  which  would  increase  the  likelihood  of  success. 

2.  Thus  far  we  have  been  considering  the  appeal  to  affection. 
Take  now  the  appeal  to  fear.  Can  this  be  increased  in  terrible¬ 
ness,  or  made  apparently  in  any  way  more  influential  than  it  is  to 
deter  from  sin?  Can  Divine  judgments  upon  daring  transgres¬ 
sors  be  any  more  swift  and  terrible — the  sinning  angels  cast 
down  to  hell ;  the  wficked  world  drowned  by  the  deluge ;  the  rain 
of  fire  and  brimstone  upon  the  cities  of  the  plain ;  the  earth  open- 


119 


in g  lier  mouth  and  closing  it  upon  Dathan  and  Abiram  for  their 
impiety  ;  the  wholesale  destruction  of  seven  nations  in  the  land 
of  Canaan  by  the  sword  and  by  the  hailstones  from  heaven  for 
their  wickedness  ?  Can  any  thing  go  beyond  this  in  promptness 
and  terribleness  of  execution? 

Can  God’s  personal  attitude  toward  sinners  be  portrayed  with 
greater  terribleness  than  it  is  in  Psalm  11  :  6 — “  Upon  the  wicked 
he  shall  rain  snares,  fire,  and  brimstone,  and  a  horrible  tempest ; 
this  shall  be  the  portion  of  their  cup  ?”  Or  this,  2  Thessalonians 
1 :  7,  8  :  “  The  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his 
mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire  taking  vengeance  on  them  that 
know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  ?”  Also,  that  solemn  warning  of  Jesus  himself  in  Luke  12  : 
5,  already  quoted :  “  Pear  him,  which  after  he  hath  killed  hath 
power  to  cast  into  hell ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear  him?” 

Can  any  more  fearful  imagery  be  conceived  than  that  which 
God  uses  to  depict  the  final  consequences  of  sin — the  undying 
worm,  the  lake  of  fire,  the  “  gnawing  of  their  tongues  for  pain,” 
the  cry  for  but  a  single  drop  of  water  to  cool  the  parched  tongue, 
and  even  this  denied?  Is  not  this  an  aggregate  of  pictured  hor¬ 
ror  to  deter  from  sin  that  cannot  be  surpassed?  Let  the  Restora- 
tionist  himself  endeavor  to  increase  its  terribleness  by  adding 
something  to  it,  and  he  will  find  at  once  how  vain  the  effort. 

3.  Now,  once  more,  can  any  mightier  agency  be  employed  to 
give  efficacy  in  the  human  soul  to  all  this  moral  machinery  than 
the  Holy  Spirit? 

His  office- work,  as  the  Saviour  says,  is  to  deal  with  the  con 
science  of  the  world  upon  this  very  matter  of  salvation.  He  saysj 
in  John  16  :  8,  “  When  he  [the  Spirit  of  truth]  is  come,  he  wil, 
convince  the  world  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment 
of  sin,  as  that  by  which  they  have  forfeited  the  favor  of  God;  of 
righteousness,  as  that  which  opens  for  them  the  great  plan  of  sal¬ 
vation  from  it ;  of  judgment,  as  the  final  and  dreadful  penalty  for 
rejecting  this  salvation.  And  the  Spirit,  it  is  believed,  is  dealing 
with  the  conscience  of  the  entire  world  upon  these  tremendous 
matters,  as  is  evident  from  the  peculiar  phraseology  of  the  pas¬ 
sage,  “  He  shall  reprove  [or  convince]  the  world  of  sin.” 

Now  the  point  is,  can  any  mightier  agency  be  employed  in 
this  work  of  conviction  in  the  human  soul,  and  so  make  these  ap¬ 
peals  to  fear  and  affection  any  more  efficacious  in  the  direction  of 
saving  men  ?  The  question  needs  only  to  be  asked,  for  he  is  the 
omnipotent  Spirit  of  God.  It  is  God  himself,  the  third  person  in 
the  Trinity,  working  directly  in  the  souls  of  men  for  their  conver¬ 
sion  and  reformation,  their  restoration  to  the  forfeited  favor  and 
friendship  of  the  Almighty  ;  and  there  is  no  power* beyond  it. 

Now  comes  up  the  great  question  we  are  discussing  :  Can 
any  thing  more  be  done  anywhere  in  God’s  universe,  or  at  any 


120 


future  time,  over  and  above  what  God  has  already  done  and  is 
doing,  to  reform  human  character?  And  the  answer  unhesitat¬ 
ingly  is,  No;  for  God  himself  has  so  declared  it.  Planting  him¬ 
self,  as  it  were,  on  these  entire  workings  of  his  providence  and 
grace  and  Spirit,  he  declares,  in  Isaiah  5  :  4,  “  What  could  have 
been  done  more  to  my  vineyard  that  I  have  not  done  in  it  ?” 
plainly  teaching  in  this  that  he  had  done  the  best  that  could  be 
done  to  save  men,  and  thus  as  plainly  asserting  that  the  very 
resources  of  Omnipotence  had  been  exhausted  in  this  world  in  the 
work  of  human  salvation;  and  if  exhausted  in  this  world,  what  is 
there  left  for  the  next  ? 

All  the  probable  surroundings  after  death  of  one  who  has 
died  in  impenitence,  are  adverse  to  the  doctrine  of  Restoration. 

What  will  be  those  surroundings'?  His  earthly  life  having 
been  one  of  prayerlessness  and  impenitence,  he  must  appear  in 
the  future  world  an  impenitent,  unhumbled,  unforgiven  sinner, 
and  his  surroundings  must  correspond  ;  for  to  assume  that  one 
with  a  sinful  character  will  pass  at  once  into  those  surroundings 
and  associations  appropriate  only  to  a  holy  character,  is  against 
common-sense.  Looking  over  these,  we  shall  see  that  every  thing 
indicates  the  probable  inferiority  of  his  future  state  to  that  of  his 
earthly  one  for  securing  salvation.  For  notice — 

He  cannot  have  the  society  of  the  holy.  To  put  him  at  once 
into  their  company  with  no  change  of  character,  would  only  be  to 
annoy  them  with  the  constant  sight  and  contact  of  sin,  making 
Heaven  for  them  an  undesirable  residence,  and  no  improvement 
on  the  wicked  associations  they  left  on  earth. 

It  would  also  be  a  companionship  as  uncongenial  and  loath¬ 
some  to  him  as  to  them. 

Moral  beings  must  seek  congenial  companionship  by  the  very 
law  of  their  natures.  The  ungodly  and  the  godly  dislike  each 
other,  and  are  repelled  from  each  other  by  mutual  antagonism  of 
character,  and  seek  only  those  who  are  like  themselves. 

Moreover  the  place  adapted  to  the  wicked  cannot  be  adapted 
to  the  holy  ;  for  the  holy  need  no  more  either  suffering  or  disci¬ 
pline  for  the  perfecting  of  character  ;  and,  therefore,  as  the  wicked 
must  be  separated  from  them,  their  warnings,  instructions  and  en¬ 
treaties,  and  their  godly  example,  will  no  longer  influence. 

Notice  also — He  will  no  longer  enjoy  the  means  of  grace. 
Prayers,  sabbaths,  sacraments,  the  bible,  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel,  and  the  means  of  grace  generally,  belonging  to  the  earthly 
probation.  Shall  they  be  introduced  into  the  future  world  ?  But 
why  ?  They  were  tried  faithfully  on  earth,  and  were  coldly  and 
contemptuously  rejected.  Why  should  they  be  tried  again?  And 
suppose  them  to  be  introduced  into  the  future  world,  who  would 
sustain  them  ?  The  righteous  no  longer  need  them  ;  they  have 


121 

entered  on  their  heavenly  surroundings.  Will  the  wicked  sustain 
that  which  they  loathe  ? 

Notice  again — The  soothing  influence  of  family  ties,  and  the 
power  of  human  affection  in  kindling  the  sensibilities,  softening 
the  heart,  and  drawing  it  outward  and  upward,  will  be  no  longer 
felt.  These  belonged  to  the  earthly  state,  and  were  a  part  of  the 
great  moral  and  social  machinery  which  God  set  in  operation  in 
this  world,  to  reach  and  influence  the  hard  heart,  and  draw  it,  to 
himself.  But  this  influence,  having  been  fully  and  faithfully 
tried  on  earth,  and  having  failed  to  renovate,  no  reason  appears 
why  it  should  be  tried  again. 

Also,  the  strivings  of  the  Holy  Spirit  will  cease.  His  gracious 
operations  were  exerted  to  the  utmost  on  earth.  He  “  convinced 
the  world  of  sin.”  (John  16:  8.)  But  only  the  righteous  were 
led  by  him  to  purity  aud  holiness.  All  others  resisted  his  efforts 
for  their  salvation.  Were  the  opportunity  given,  they  would  re¬ 
sist  them  again  and  bring  on  themselves  a  correspondingly  ag¬ 
gravated  condemnation ;  and  therefore,  they  will  be  tried  no 
more.* 

Once  more — The  society  of  the  sinner  will  necessarily  be 
that  of  the  wicked  who,  like  himself,  are  meeting  the  proper  con¬ 
sequences  of  their  sin  ;  and  their  influence  upon  him,  like  that  of 
the  felons  in  our  state  prisons,  can  only  be  to  confirm  him  in  im¬ 
penitence. 

We  find  no  elements  therefore,  in  the  probable  condition 
after  death  of  the  one  who  has  died  in  impenitence,  which  are  any 
improvement  on  the  earthly  state,  or  adapted  in  any  way  to  break 
up  sinful  habits ;  while  they  all  seem  adapted  rather  to  confirm 
them.  His  earthly  state  God  arranged  with  prime  reference  to 
his  repentance  and  salvation,  and  made  it  the  best  possible  ;  but 
he  would  not  profit  by  it,  and  clung,  with  the  very  frenzy  of  des¬ 
peration,  to  his  sinful  indulgence.  And  now  when  probation  is 

*  Some  hold  that  probation  after  death  is  taught  in  1  Pet.  3  :  19,  but 
the  evidence  is  very  inconclusive. 

1.  The  mass  of  commentators  explain  the  passage  satisfactorily  with¬ 
out  any  such  interpretation. 

2.  It  is  impossible  to  see  any  reason  why  the  Gospel  should  be  preached 
to  the  antediluvious  particularly.  Why  not  to  other  sinners  ? 

3.  There  is  no  evidence  that  if  Christ  did  visit  Hades  with  the  proc¬ 
lamation  of  pardon,  that  any  accepted  it. 

4.  If  he  did  go  on  such  a  mission,  the  reason  may  perhaps  be  found 
in  this — That  in  the  coming  ages  the  idea  might  come  to  be  entertained 
among  newly  created  beings  that  the  further  punishment  of  the  wicked 
was  unnecessary  ;  that  the  provisions  of  the  atonement  were  infinite,  and 
that,  if  the  opportunity  were  only  presented,  they  would  accept  of  salva¬ 
tion.  And,  therefore  the  offer  of  salvation  was  made,  but  only  resulted 
in  its  utter  and  impious  rejection.  How  many  convicts  in  our  prisons 
would  give  up  their  prison  life  on  the  required  condition  of  becoming 
humble  and  holy ! 


122 


ended,  and  means  of  grace  have  ceased,  and  tlie  influences  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  are  no  longer  exerted,  and  the  mass  of  counteracting 
and  restraining  motive  ever  operating  upon  the  sinner  here,  is 
withdrawn,  and  wicked  beings  have  become  his  only  companions, 
what,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  can  be  looked  for  then  but 
an  energy  and  persistency  in  the  choice  of  evil  corresponding  with 
the  absence  of  these  counteracting  influences.  And  wThere  in  all 
the  future  history  of  such  a  soul,  can  we  find  any  good  foundation 
for  hope  that  it  will  stop  sinning.  Verily  does  the  sinful  habit 
become,  to  all  appearance,  confirmed  and  inveterate ;  so  that 
nothing  is  left  for  the  one  dying  in  his  transgression,  but  eternal 
sinfulness. 

The  assumption  therefore,  of  the  Restorationists  that  there 
are  resources  for  the  salvation  of  men  in  the  future  world  beyond 
what  God  uses  in  this,  is  baseless.  No  reason  appears  why  the 
natural  consequences  of  sin — the  natural  operation  of  “  the  law 
of  sin  and  death,”  should  not  work  on  in  the  experience  of  the 
sinner  in  the  future  world  as  energetically  and  disastrously  as 
here  ;  nor  why  indeed,  the  process  should  ever  be  arrested.  To 
all  appearance  the  habit  of  sinning  to  which  he  has  surrendered 
himself  will  result  in  confirmed  and  hopeless  impenitence,  binding 
him  in  chains  that  never  shall  be  broken. 

Let  the  Restorationist,  therefore,  be  assured  that  bis  scheme 
is  without  foundation  ;  that  the  wdiole  universe  of  God  can  furnish 
no  mightier  agencies  to  save  him  than  those  which  God  tries  upon 
him  here  in  this  world,  and  that  if  he  dares  to  resist  these,  and 
go  into  the  future  world  without  repentance  for  sin  and  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ,  he  chooses  a  position  where  nothing  better  can  ever 
reach  him,  and  hands  over  himself,  from  the  very  necessities  of 
the  case,  to  final  and  eternal  impenitence. 

His  endless  perdition  appears,  therefore,  certain  and  inevit¬ 
able  from  the  fact  that  nothing  more  can  be  done  for  him  than  has 
been  done. 


objection:  condition  of  the  heathen. 

At  this  point  comes  up  the  objection  that  the  heathen,  as  well 
as  the  ignorant  and  vicious  of  our  city  populations,  do  not  enjoy 
these  privileges,  and  therefore  do  not  have  in  this  world  a  fair 
probation,  and  are  not  proper  subjects  for  punishment  hereafter; 
and  therefore  that  a  future  probation  is  necessary  for  them,  in 
order  to  vindicate  the  benevolence  of  God.  Answer: 

1.  They  are  truly  sinful.  They  do  not  act  up  to  the  light 
and  knowledge  they  have.  For  example: 

They  know  God;  for  said  Paul  in  his  preaching  to  such  (Acts 
14  :  17) :  “  He  left  not  himself  without  witness,  in  that  he  did 
good,  and  gave  us  rain  from  heaven,  and  fruitful  seasons,  filling 
our  hearts  with  food  and  gladness.” 


123 


Also,  they  have  a  conscience ;  for  the  apostle  says,  in  Romans 
2  :  15,  respecting  such :  “  Winch  show  the  work  of  the  law  written 
in  their  hearts,  their  conscience  also  bearing  witness.” 

And  against  this  light  and  reason  they  sin.  “  They  did  not 
like  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge.”  (Rom.  1 :  28.)  And  “when 
they  knew  God,  they  glorified  him  not  as  God,  neither  were  thank¬ 
ful /”  (Rom.  i.  21.)  Thus  bringing  the  charge  of  wilful  and  wicked 
ingratitude  against  the  whole  heathen  world. 

2.  They  are  inexcusable  in  their  sinfulness;  for  says  the  apos¬ 
tle  (Rom.  1:20) :  “For  the  invisible  things  of  God  since  the  crea¬ 
tion  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  perceived  through  the 
things  that  are  made,  even  his  everlasting  power  and  divinity,  that 
they  may  be  without  excuse .”  (Revised  Version.) 

Moreover,  every  man  knows  that  he  should  “love  his  neigh¬ 
bor  as  himself,”  and,  whenever  he  takes  a  selfish  advantage  of  him, 
knows  that  he  is  not  doing  as  he  would  be  done  by  ;  and  no  depth 
of  moral  degradation  can  ever  obliterate  from  his  mind  the  con¬ 
viction  of  his  meanness  and  wickedness. 

3.  The  heathen  fully  recognize  their  own  guilt,  and  are  seeking 
by  sacrifice,  prayers,  fasting,  pilgrimages  and  penance  to  propitiate 
an  offended  Deity.  And  if  with  these  external  professions,  there 
is  any — the  least  real  penitence  for  sin,  or  real  gratitude  for 
mercies,  or  the  indulgence  of  any  true,  honest  and  upright  feeling ; 
in  short  if  there  be  so  much  of  sincerity  and  honesty  of  heart  that 
if  Christ  were  made  known  to  such  a  one,  he  would  be  accepted 
by  him,  there  is  good  and  sufficient  reason  for  believing  that  such 
a  one  will  be  saved.  For  notice  this  declaration — “Behold  I  stand 
at  the  door  and  knock ;  if  any  man  hear  my  voice  and  open  the 
door ,  I  will  come  in  to  him,”  (Rev.  3  :  20.)  Notice  it  does  not  say 
how  wide — it  may  be  but  a  crack  as  it  were,  but  if  the  door  be 
opened — perhaps  but  just  a  little  somewhat — that  is,  if  a  single 
true  and  right  feeling  be  indulged  toward  God,  then,  with  that 
state  of  mind  and  heart,  the  Spirit  will  “come  in  to  him,”  and 
give  him  an  earnest  of  the  heavenly  inheritance. 

For,  “in  every  nation  he  that  feareth  God  and  worketh  right¬ 
eousness  is  accepted  with  him;”  (Acts  10:35.)  And  true  penitence 
and  true  gratitude,  and  any  true  and  right  feeling  is  “working 
righteousness  ;”  and  it  would  seem  that  such  a  one  would  gladly 
accept  of  Christ  as  soon  as  he  is  made  known  to  him  in  the  future 
world.  And  any  one  who  would  accept  of  Christ,  were  he  but 
revealed  to  him,  will  undoubtedly  be  saved. 

But  if  he  only  makes  a  pretense  of  sorrow  for  sin — at  the 
bottom  a  sham  and  an  attempt  to  impose  on  the  god  he  worships 
— or  if  he  expresses  gratitude,  and  still  has  no  thankfulness  at 
heart,  no  reason  appears  why  he  does  not  merit  a  condemnation 
proportioned  to  his  ingratitude  and  hypocrisy.  Therefore, 

4.  The  heathen  do  have  a  fair  probation.  Every  one  of  them 


124 


in  many  things  sees  clearly  what  is  right ;  and  whenever  he  sees 
it,  is  eternally  bound  by  it  in  the  face  of  all  opposing  influence. 
When  he  has  seen  the  right,  there  is  and  there  can  be  no  excuse 
for  not  following  it.  Not  to  follow  it  is  sin — high-handed  and 
inexcusable  sin — and  deserving  of  punishment. 

And  it  is  for  this  he  is  to  be  punished ;  and  his  punishment 
is  not  to  go  one  iota  beyond  his  real  and  inexcusable  guilt. 
True  it  is  that,  to  a  certain  extent,  he  is  ignorant ;  and  the  fact 
will  be  fully  taken  into  account,  and  will  go  far 
toward  mitigating  the  severity  of  his  punishment;  for 
said  the  Saviour,  “He  that  knew  not ,  and  did  commit  things 
worthy  of  stripes,  shall  be  beaten  with  few  stripes.”  (Luke  12: 
48.) 

“But,”  says  the  objector,  “he  has  not  the  light  of  the  gospel.” 
True,  and  this  fact  also  will  make  his  sin  and  punishment  corres¬ 
pondingly  light. 

“  But  why,  then,”  he  asks,  “does  he  not  have  the  gospel  ?  Why, 
if  it  be  so  priceless  a  blessing,  has  it  not  been  given  to  the  world 
long  ere  this?  Why  have  eighteen  centuries  rolled  away  since 
Christ  died  upon  the  cross,  and  yet  the  mass  of  mankind  never 
heard  of  him  ?  God  could  have  strewn  the  world  with  Bibles,  in 
every  language,  if  he  so  pleased.  Why  has  he  not  done  it  ?  Why 
is  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  world  to-day  cursed  with  heathenish 
blindness  and  ignorance?” 

We  are  too  ignorant  and  short-sighted  ourselves  to  answer 
these  questions  fully  ;  but  some  things  are  to  be  considered : 

1.  The  one  urging  this  assumes  that  if  only  this  were  done 
the  heathen  would  be  saved.  But  this  assumption  is  groundless. 
How  few  comparatively  accept  the  gospel,  and  are  saved  by  it, 
even  in  Christian  lands !  Onty  one  in  floe  pretends  to  be  godty 
even  in  this  land — the  most  highly  favored  with  the  gospel  and  its 
institutions. 

2.  To  those  in  Christian  lands  who  neglect  or  reject  it,  as  the 
masses  do,  it  becomes  only  an  additional  burden  of  condemnation ; 
as  the  apostle  called  it,  “a  savor  of  death  unto  death.”  (2  Cor.  2: 
16.) 

3.  Should  the  gospel,  therefore,  be  given  the  world  in  any 
other  way  than  the  one  God  has  chosen — namely,  through  the 
efforts  and  self-denials  and  sacrifices  of  his  Church — the  result 
might  only  be  disastrous,  very  likely  resulting  only  in  a  cold  and 
contemptuous  rejection  of  it,  and  a  correspondingly  deeper  guilt 
and  ruin. 

4.  The  use  the  heathen  make  of  the  light  and  knowledge  they 
have  shows  the  use  they  might  make  of  greater  privileges.  If 
they  abuse  the  light  they  have,  they  might  abuse  greater.  “  He 
that  is  unjust  in  the  least  is  unjust  also  in  much.”  (Luke  16  :  10.) 
And  how  fast,  and  how  far,  and  in  what  way,  wicked  men,  any- 


125 


where  in  the  world,  can  be  successfully  approached  with  gospel 
privileges  so  as  to  secure  the  certainty  of  their  salvation  is  a  prob¬ 
lem  God  only  can  solve ;  and  we  are  obliged  to  leave  the  solution 
of  it  with  him,  only  being  careful  to  do  our  own  personal  duty  in 
the  premises,  and  preach  his  gospel  with  all  our  might  and  as 
widely  as  we  have  opportunity. 

5.  We  have  every  reason  for  believing  that  God  is  blessing  all 
efforts  made  to  give  the  gospel  to  the  world  to  the  full  extent  that  he 
wisely  and  properly  can,  and  stimulating  his  Church  to  the  utmost  to 
spread  the  true  knowledge  of  himself  among  men,  in  exact  accord¬ 
ance  with  his  own  declaration  that  he  is  “not  williug  that  any 
should  perish;”  and  that  should  he  deviate  in  the  least  from  the 
plan  he  has  chosen,  he  would  endanger  the  welfare  of  his  entire 
administration. 

PRACTICAL  EFFECTS  OF  THE  SYSTEM  OF  RESTORATIONISM. 

Thus  far  the  effort  has  been  to  show  that  the  position  of  the 
Restorationist  was  untenable.  A  word  further  as  to  the  practical 
bearings  of  the  system. 

1.  It  tempts  every  sinner  to  continue  in  rebellion  against 
God.  For,  with  his  utter  reluctance  to  give  up  his  own  will  and 
way,  and  submit  to  God,  if  he  can  be  made  to  feel  that  he  can  in 
any  way  whatever — by  any  amount  of  suffering,  or  through  any 
experience  in  the  future  world — only  come  out  right  in  the  end , 
he  will  dare  the  experiment  of  continuing  in  rebellion.  For  no 
matter  how  severe  or  how  long  protracted  his  punishment  may 
be,  it  will,  according  to  the  scheme  of  the  Restorationist, 
all  finally  become  an  infinitissimal — a  mere  nothing  in  comparison 
with  the  succeding  eternity  of  blessedness  ;  and  the  sinner  will 
certainly  dare  it  before  he  will  give  up  sinning,  and  submit  him¬ 
self  to  God.  In  his  contemplation  of  the  future,  he  will  pass  over 
all  the  intermediate  suffering,  and  fix  his  thought  solely  on  the 
final  blessedness ;  and  the  threatenings  of  the  Bible  against  sin¬ 
ners  will  have  no  weight  with  him  whatever. 

Canon  Farrar  evidently  sees  this ;  and,  therefore,  after  com¬ 
forting  the  sinner  with  the  hope  of  final  restoration,  is  careful  to 
portray  his  limited  punishment  in  the  darkest  colors  possible. 
But  his  effort  will  be  a  practical  failure,  for  the  reason  above 
stated — that  if  he  consoles  him  with  the  prospect  of  eternal  bless¬ 
edness  at  last  he  relieves  him  from  all  anxiety  for  the  future. 

Channing  also,  in  his  sermon  on  “  The  evil  of  sin,”  makes  a 
similar  effort,  and  which,  so  far  as  tending  to  secure  the  conver¬ 
sion  of  men  is  concerned,  is  practically  as  useless. 

2.  In  another  view  the  entire  scheme  is  irrational.  The  only 
effect  of  continued  sin  is  increasing  hardness.  Such  is  the  testi¬ 
mony  of  all  observation  here  in  this  world.  And  now  the  assump- 


126 


tion  is  that  this  continued  sin  and  rebellion  against  God,  and  which 
has  been  intensifying  for  years  or  ages,  as  the  case  may  be,  is,  all 
at  once,  to  lose  its  hardening  tendency,  and  under  the  continued 
pressure  of  divine  judgments,  to  run  into  a  softening  process. 
Pharaoh  did  not  soften  under  Divine  judgments  ;  and  the  Devil, 
after  having  endured  the  bottomless  pit  for  a  thousand  years,  the 
moment  he  was  released,  went  out  to  light  against  God  as  resolute¬ 
ly  as  ever.  (See  Xiev.  20th  ch.)  And  ages  of  rebellion  in  the 
case  of  every  sinner  would  undoubtedly  be  followed  by  the  same 
result. 


PREACHING  THE  GOSPEL  IN  HELL. 

Perhaps,  however,  the  restorationist  assumes  that  a  grand 
system  of  reformatory  influences  will,  at  some  future  time,  be  in¬ 
troduced  into  Hell — some  moral  machinery  to  overcome  the  hard¬ 
ness  and  obduracy  and  rebellion  of  souls  in  perdition.  It  is  in¬ 
teresting  to  contemplate  the  possible  details  of  such  an  effort. 
Manifestly  it  could  only  be  done  through  some  plan  of  religious 
exertion. — something  in  the  line  of  Christian  endeavor — something 
that  should  bring  the  influence  of  the  Gospel  to  bear  upon  them. 
For  if  they  are  ever  saved,  it  must  be  through  repentance  and 
faith  in  Christ.  Therefore  the  offer  of  pardon  through  him  must 
be  made  to  them ;  and  they  must  be  induced  to  accept  it.  There¬ 
fore,  it  would  seem  that  the  Gospel  must  be  preached  to  them. 
Then,  in  addition  to  the  preaching,  there  would  apparently  be 
needed  the  appropriate  accompaniments  of  preaching — prayers 
and  praises,  and  sacraments  and  sabbaths,  and  the  means  of  grace 
generally.  In  short,  the  supposition  is  that,  in  such  a  case,  all 
Heaven  would  be  moved  by  one  grand  impulse  to  leave  the  world 
of  glory  and  go  down  into  Hell ;  that  angels  and  archangels  and 
redeemed  saints  and  the  great  Savior  himself,  would  make  up  one 
mighty  assemblage  all  moving  onward  simultaneously  on  this  great 
errand  of  salvation. 

No  doubt  all  holy  beings  would  gladly  do  this  if  it  could  be 
done ;  or  if  being  done,  it  would  be  of  the  least  avail.  But  what 
would  be  likely  to  be  their  reception  in  the  world  of  Perdition  ? 
The  parties  to  be  reached  would  be  the  devil  and  his  angels  and 
the  wicked  from  this  world.  How  would  they  feel  as  they  saw 
the  pure  and  holy  Heaven  coming  directly  down  to  them,  and 
heard  the  high  song  of  salvation  “  Worthy  is  the  Lamb,”  sound¬ 
ing  through  the  infernal  regions  ?  They  had  been  cursing  and 
blaspheming  God,  and  wallowing  in  their  own  filthiness  for  hun¬ 
dreds  or  thousands  of  years  or  ages,  as  the  case  might  be ;  and 
now  they  confront  the  majesty,  the  purity,  the  holiness  of  the  very 
one  against  whom  they  have  sinned,  and  whom  they  have  all  the 
while  been  blaspheming  on  account  of  their  plagues,  as  they  did 


127 


at  the  outset  in  Rev.  16 :  9,  11,  21.  How  would  the  devils  and 
wicked  men  manage  sueh.an  encounter,  while  their  proud,  unhum- 
*  bled,  God-defying  impulses  were  raging  and  burning  within 
them  ? 

Is  it  said  that  the  fires  of  perdition  that  have  been  kindled 
upon  them,  have,  all  the  while,  in  the  lapse  of  ages,  been  purify¬ 
ing,  softening  and  elevating  them,  and  burning  up  the  impurities 
of  their  characters  ?  Fire  may  purify  metals,  but  does  remorse 
purify  ?  Do  the  burning  memories  of  past  meanness  and  wicked¬ 
ness  and  ingratitude  and  hatred  of  God  that  characterized  their 
earthly  probation,  have  any  tendency  to  improve  character? 

When  the  devils  saw  Christ  coming  on  earth ,  they  had  no 
idea  that  he  could  come  to  them  for  any  thing  but  judgment,  and 
were  undoubtedly  right.  “  Art  thou  come”  they  said  “  to  torm¬ 
ent  us  before  the  time  ?  ”  There  was  no  question  in  their  minds 
as  to  the  result  of  the  meeting  when  the  time  came,  but  why 
hasten  it  was  the  only  question.  Why  torment  us  before  the  time? 
They  would  feel  the  same  at  any  future  time  should  they  see  him 
coming  to  the  world  of  perdition.  Knowing  the  utter  antagonism 
of  character,  between  themselves  and  him,  and  feeling  the  kind¬ 
lings  of  hate  against  him  for  their  already  protracted  torment, 
would  they,  could  they  have  any  other  thought  than  that  he  had 
come  to  deal  with  them  still  in  judgment?  Why  should  they? 
What  had  they  done  in  the  meantime  to  change  in  any  way  their 
relations  to  him,  or  of  his  to  them  ? 

As  to  the  sinners  from  this  world,  if  they  shrank  from  “  the 
wrath  of  the  Lamb”  at  the  judgment,  why  not  now?  What  had 
they  done  in  the  meantime  to  make  that  wrath  burn  against  them 
with  any  less  of  indignation  and  terror  ?  They  started  on  their 
experience  of  punishment  with  cursing  and  blasphemy  of  God  for 
his  righteous  judgments ;  and  the  angel  sung  it  through  all 
Heaven  “  Even  so  Lord  God  Almighty,  true  and  righteous  are  thy 
judgments.”  (Rev.  16:7.)  If  at  the  outset  they  blasphemed  the 
God  of  Heaven  for  the  infliction  of  judgments  upon  them  that 
were  right  and  deserved,  then  why,  with  no  change  of  character, 
should  the  blasphemy  be  suspended  ?  What  should  change  that 
blasphemy  into  cheerful  acquiescence  in  the  Divine  dealings,  so 
that  God  could  now  look  upon  them  with  complacency  ?  If  they 
“  repented  not”  at  the  outset  of  God’s  dealings  with  them,  and 
met  him  only  with  hatred  and  cursing,  is  it  likely  that  the  con¬ 
tinuance  of  the  same  dealings  would  be  followed  by  just  the  op¬ 
posite  result  ?  Does  the  continuation  of  suffering  tend  in  any 
way  to  reconcile  the  soul  to  its  infliction,  or  diminish  hatred  tow¬ 
ards  the  author  of  it  ?  And,  therefore,  if  at  the  Judgment  they 
called  on  the  rocks  and  the  mountains  to  fall  on  them  and  hide 
them  from  his  face,  so  would  they  flee  in  terror  from  him  at  any 
future  time,  and  after  the  long  experience  of  his  indignation,  cry 


128 


with  ten-fold  earnestness  to  be  “hidden  from  the  face  of  him  that 
sitteth  on  the  throne,  and  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb.”  (Rev. 
6:  16.) 

3.  In  this  view,  it  is  melancholy  to  contemplate  the  position 
of  men  eminent  for  learning  and  influence,  who  have  yet  publicly 
advocated  this  doctrine  of  Restorationism  should  their  scheme  turn 
out  at  length  a  failure.  It  has  been  shown  conclusively  that  the 
doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment  is  not  an  absurdity,  as  these  men 
claim,  and  can  in  no  way  be  shown  to  be  such;  and,  therefore, 
that  it  may  be  true. 

Now  theie  are  some  things  in  debate  respecting  which  it  is 
immaterial  on  which  side  the  truth  may  lie.  Space  may  be  filled 
with  an  etherial  substance  or  it  may  not.  There  may  be  two 
kinds  of  electricity  or  only  one,  and  whatever  the  truth  may  finally 
be,  makes  no  material  difference.  But  in  the  case  under  consider¬ 
ation,  what  an  awful  difference  in  the  ffnal  result,  should  Restora¬ 
tionism  prove  a  failure.  Suppose  the  strictly  evangelical  view 
should  finally  turn  out  to  be  the  true  one,  then  will  it  appear  that 
these  men  had  only  been  lending  their  brilliant  talents  and  com¬ 
manding  influence  to  help  on  the  perdition  of  ungodly  men, 
and  that  they  struck  hands  with  the  Devil  in  luring  them  to 
everlasting  burnings. 

6.  The  endless  confinement  of  the  sinner  inevitable  because 
nothing  else  can  be  done  with  him. 

(1.)  There  would  be  nothing  gained  by  his  release .  The  result 
of  such  an  experiment  is  detailed  at  length  in  Rev.  20th  chapter, 
where  the  devil,  as  has  been  mentioned,  after  having  endured  the 
torments  of  perdition  a  thousand  years,  the  moment  he  was 
released,  went  right  about  the  work  of  stirring  up  the  nations 
against  God  with  the  same  energy,  persistency  and  malignity  as 
before ;  showing  that  this  long  period  of  confinement  and  suffering 
had  done  nothing  to  improve  his  character  or  diminish  in  any 
degree  his  hatred  of  the  Almighty. 

And  such  we  conclude  would  be  the  result  of  every  such 
experiment.  The  longer  the  rebellion  of  the  heart  is  indulged, 
the  more  inveterate  does  it  become  ;  and  the  sufferings  of  per¬ 
dition,  however  great  and  however  long  continued,  being  as  they 
will  be  the  direct  infliction  of  the  Almighty,  will  only  intensify  the 
hatred  of  the  sinner  against  him ;  and  were  he  at  any  time  released 
from  confinement,  would  break  out  against  him  with  correspond¬ 
ingly  greater  malignity  and  intensity. 

(2.)  The  offer  of  salvation  in  Hell  would  be  rejected.  Suppose 
the  offer  of  salvation  were  made  to  sinners  in  Hell  as  it  was  on 
earth.  This  could  only  be  done  on  condition  of  humiliation,  peni¬ 
tence  and  brokenness  of  heart  for  sin  ;  for  certainly  no  less  exact- 


129 


ing  conditions  of  salvation  could  be  required  of  those  in  perdition 
than  were  required  on  earth.  Now  what  reason  is  there  for  sup¬ 
posing  that  the  offer  would  be  accepted  ? 

The  very  idea  of  penitential  sorrow  for  sin,  and  the  acknowl¬ 
edgment  of  God’s  justice  in  their  perdition,  and  that  they  were 
truly  hell-deserving  sinners,  would  be  met  by  them  with  the  intens- 
est  loathing  at  any  time  in  their  future  history.  Milton  is  true  to 
the  natural  workings  of  a  sinful  heart  when  he  puts  it  into  the 
mouth  of  the  fallen  seraph,  “Better  to  reign  in  hell  than  serve  in 
heaven.”  The  idea  to  a  sinner  in  perdition  of  serving  God,  bow¬ 
ing  down  to  him  in  humiliation,  renouncing  pride  and  self  and 
self-seeking,  and  feeling  himself  nothing  in  his  sight,  and  cheer¬ 
fully  and  lovingly  acknowledging  him  as  his  rightful  Sovereign, 
has  in  it,  to  a  sinful  mind,  as  a  heart-experience,  the  most  hateful 
and  revolting  elements  conceivable  and  he  would  rather  endure 
the  torments  of  perdition  than  purchase  exemption  from  them  at 
such  a  price.  The  very  central  thought,  principle  and  determina¬ 
tion  of  the  sinful  mind,  and  one  that  will  continue  to  dominate  it 
in  spite  of  any  and  all  experience  of  suffering,  is  the  one  which 
our  Saviour  puts  into  the  mouths  of  the  wicked  “citizens”  in  the 
parable — “We  will  not  have  this  man  to  reign  over  vs."  (Luke 
19:  14.) 

(8.)  The  annihilation  of  the  wicked  impossible. 

If  the  wicked  cannot  be  reformed  in  the  future  world,  can 
they  not  be  annihilated.  This,  too,  is  impossible  ;  for  in  that  case, 
according  to  the  view  we  are  taking,  the  very  next  race  of  moral 
beings  created  after  their  annihilation,  having  now  no  tangible  and 
convincing  evidence  of  God’s  hatred  of  sin,  or  of  its  terrible  nature, 
or  of  the  danger  of  committing  it — in  short  no  appeal  to  fear — 
would  certainly  do  as  their  predecessors  had  done,  and  rebel.  Why 
should  they  not  ?  If  the  circumstances  become  the  same, 
why  should  not  the  result  be  the  same  ?  Then  they,  too, 
must  be  annihilated;  and  so  the  next,  and  also  the  next, 
and  so  there  be  nothing  left  but  for  the  universe  to  revolve  in  an 
endless  cycle  of  sin  and  annihilation ;  and  such  a  universe  would 
be  an  absurdity. 

(4.)  Endless  freedom  while  sinning  impossible. 

If  the  wicked  can  neither  be  reformed  nor  annihilated,  can 
they  not  be  allowed  to  range  the  universe  at  will  and  work  out 
their  wickedness  unchecked,  anywhere  and  everywhere  forever  ? 
This  would  make  a  universal  hell.  Only  let  the  wicked  go  unpun¬ 
ished,  and  all  other  moral  beings,  as  we  have  seen,  would  follow 
their  example,  and  rebel  against  the  authority  of  God ;  and  uni¬ 
versal  rebellion,  as  was  shown  in  another  connection,  would  make 


130 

a  universal  hell,  to  which  the  hell  of  the  Bible  would  be  compara¬ 
tively  an  insignificant  matter. 

(5.)  The  endless  confinement  of  the  sinner  the  07ily  alternative. 

There  is,  therefore,  no  other  alternative  but  the  confinement  of 
incorrigible  sinners  forever  in  the  great  prison  house  of  the  universe. 
Because  sin  must  be  arrested,  as  has  been  said,  at  all  hazards,  and 
every  conceivable  sacrifice  necessary  ;  and  any  thing  that  will 
but  accomplish  this  must,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  be  not 
only  indispensable,  but  benevolent. 

Endless  punishment  is,  therefore,  only  a  benevolent  arrange¬ 
ment,  reducing,  as  it  does,  to  the  minimum  the  necessary  suffer¬ 
ings  of  a  universe  which  sin  has  invaded ;  and  the  endless 
confinement  of  the  sinner  becomes  certain  and  inevitable  in  this 
two-fold  aspect,  that  nothing  more  can  be  done  for  him,  and 
nothing  else  can  be  done  with  him. 

RECAPITULATION. 

This  whole  matter  of  Endless  Punishment  has  its  ultimate 
foundation  in  principles  of  moral  government,  which  are  univer¬ 
sally  known  and  acknowledged. 

For  example — In  all  human  relations  the  obligation  of  the 
government  to  threaten  and  execute  penalty,  is  measured  by  the 
welfare  and  happiness  of  those  who  come  rightly  under  its  pro¬ 
tection.  The  peace  and  order  of  the  family  are  secured  solely 
by  paternal  authority  enforced  ;  and  the  most  unhappy  and  the 
least  prosperous  families  are  those  the  most  poorly  governed. 
So  in  the  state.  No  one  thing  is  so  essential  to  its  prosperity  as 
a  stable  administration  of  the  government.  Even  if  there  be  any 
failure  in  the  thoroughness  and  perfection  of  its  working,  every 
interest  suffers.  And  the  suffering  and  the  mischief  are,  as  a 
general  thing,  exactly  proportioned  to  the  extent  of  its  efficiency, 
even  as  the  prosperity  is  proportioned  to  the  thoroughness  and 
completeness  of  its  sway. 

Furthermore,  the  worst  thing  conceivable  in  the  governments 
of  this  world  is  the  powerlessness  of  law,  and  the  leaders  of  a  riot 
are  shot  and  bayoneted  in  the  public  streets  without  mercy,  and 
men  feel  that  law  and  order,  even  at  this  price,  are  cheaply  pur¬ 
chased.  And  no  matter  what  may  be  the  sacrifice  necessary  to 
secure  the  supremacy  of  law,  the  conviction  of  all  good  men  is  that 
it  pays.  Any  sacrifice  of  property  or  life  even,  be  it  only  neces¬ 
sary  to  save  the  government  from  contempt,  and  secure  the  proper 
influence  of  law  and  authority,  is  made  at  once,  even  from  the 
merest  dictates  of  benevolence. 

Also  any  degree  of  punishment  which  human  law  can  inflict, 


131 


be  it  only  necessary  to  sustain  the  influence  of  law  and  authority, 
is  regarded,  the  world  over,  as  benevolent ;  so  that  the  stability 
of  government,  becomes  the  end  to  which  all  other  interests  are 
made  subordinate  and  subservient. 

The  bearing  of  this  great  principle,  so  universally  recognized, 
upon  the  matter  of  future  punishment,  is  clearly  evident.  Could 
it  be  demonstrated  that  the  supremacy  of  God’s  law  in  his  uni¬ 
verse  through  endless  ages,  could  be  secured  only  by  the  endless 
punishment  of  the  transgressors  of  it,  then  the  perfect  benevolence 
of  even  this  tremendous  evil,  would  be  also  perfectly  demon¬ 
strated.  For  the  punishment  and  the  suffering  of  the  violators  of 
God’s  great  law  to  any  extent,  even  that  of  endless ,  is  not  by  any 
means  the  worst  thing.  Endless  contempt  of  law  in  an  endless 
universe,  in  the  utter  disorder  and  awful  terror,  and  mighty  suf¬ 
fering  that  would  follow  it,  would  be  inconceivably  more  dreadful. 
And  even  as  jails,  penitentiaries  and  prisons  are  benevolent  in  the 
limited  and  inferior  interests  of  human  governments,  and  because 
indispensable  to  keep  down  the  tendencies  to  human  license  and 
lawlessness,  are  felt  to  be  necessary  safe-guards  of  the  public 
welfare,  so,  on  the  loftier  field  of  God’s  administration,  where  this 
same  tendency  exists — where  the  inclination  to  throw  off  the 
restraints  of  law,  growing  out  of  the  conscious  freedom  and  inde¬ 
pendence  of  the  moral  agent,  is  ever  the  terrible  emergency  to  be 
met  and  counteracted,  and  which,  we  have  every  reason  to  believe, 
will  exist  forever,  even  the  great  prison-house  of  Hell,  considered 
as  the  place  of  punishment  for  the  incorrigibly  wicked,  may  be, 
even  upon  the  grounds  of  human  reason ,  a  necessary  and  indis¬ 
pensable,  and  therefore  benevolent  arrangement.  For  be  it  remem¬ 
bered,  that  the  endless  suffering  of  all  the  sinners  in  God’s 
dominions  who  will  finally  be  punished,  would  only  be  to  the 
misery  of  unrestrained  rebellion,  as  a  drop  to  the  ocean  in  com¬ 
parison. 

Sec.  6.  The  Grand  Dilemma — Hell ,  or  no  Moral  System . 

A  moral  system  is  composed  of  free  moral  agents,  and  can  be 
composed  of  no  others — beings  free  to  act  right  or  wrong,  and  be 
justly  subject  to  praise  or  blame,  and  be  burdened,  therefore,  with 
the  “perilous  responsibility  of  character.” 

Now  if  a  moral  system  is  to  exist,  then  moral  beings  must  be 
created ,  whatever  use  they  make  of  their  free  agency.  This  is  so 
plain  that  nothing  can  be  more  so. 

Another  thing — If  such  a  system  exists,  certain  results  will 
surely  flow  from  it.  This  too,  is  inevitable.  Some  of  these  results 
will  be  natural  and  necessary  and,  therefore  unavoidable ;  others 
merely  certain  but  not  necessary.  AVe  group  both  together  now, 
and  call  them  the  inevitable  exactions  or  exigencies  of  a  moral  sys- 


132 


tem — things  which,  if  such  a  system  is  to  exist,  will  surely  come 
to  pass — which,  therefore,  the  system,  as  it  were,  exacts  on  the 
simple  condition  of  existence. 

1.  One  of  these  inevitable  exigencies  is,  that  the  first  moral 
beings  created,  in  the  view  we  are  taking,  will  sin.  We  say 
inevitable,  not  because  such  beings  cannot  help  sinning,  but  only 
because,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  certainly  will.  They  can  sin 
because  they  are  free ;  they  will  be  inclined  to  sin  because  they 
naturally  like  to  exercise  their  freedom,  and  have  their  own  way ; 
and  they  will  certainly  sin  because  all  the  motives  and  influences 
proper  to  be  used  with  them,  will  not  prevent  it.  If,  therefore, 
a  moral  system  is  to  exist,  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  the  first 
moral  beings  comprising  it  will  sin. 

Also,  if  this  world  is  to  be  created  and  peopled,  it  is  certain 
that  it  will  be  also  a  world  of  sinners. 

Why  they  will  sin,  and  why  God  does  not  prevent  their  sin 
have  been  considered  elsewhere.  We  are  concerned  now  with 
the  mere  fact  that  moral  beings,  if  a  system  of  such  be  brought 
into  existence,  will  certainly  sin. 

2.  Another  inevitable  exigency  of  the  system  is,  that  the  first 
beings  will  sin  in  such  peculiar  circumstances  of  aggravation, 
that  their  sin  will  be  remediless,  and  their  case  hopeless.  Their 
sin  will  be  so  inexcusable  and  dreadful  as  to  throw  them,  in  the 
very  nature  of  their  mental  and  moral  constitution  beyond  the 
possibility  of  restoration  to  God’s  forfeited  favor.  God  cannot 
consistently  “  take  hold ”  of  them  as  of  the  sinful  of  this  world, 
(Heb.  2 :  10  Rev.  Yer.)  and  they  cannot  be  reclaimed  to  a  holy 
and  heavenly  life. 

The  same  moral  condition  is  spoken  of  in  the  Bible  as  be¬ 
longing  to  some  sinners  in  this  world.  They  too  become  so 
hardened  in  transgression,  and  so  insensible  to  the  motives  to 
right  living  and  acting,  that  nothing  can  move  them  to  repentance 
and  reformation.  We  should  infer  this  from  personal  observation 
merely,  although  not  able  exactly  to  demonstrate  it.  So  far  as 
we  can  see,  men  become  hopelessly  hardened  ;  that  is,  so  hardened 
that  all  means  and  efforts  for  their  recovery  become  apparently  of 
no  avail. 

But  the  Scriptures  go  bej^ond  this,  and  affirm  positively  that 
in  the  case  of  certain  sinners,  “it  is  impossible  to  renew  them  to 
repentance.”  (Heb.  6:  4,  6.)  that  they  are  “past  feeling.” 
(Epli.  4:  19.)  The  doctrine  of  these  passages  is  that  such 
is  the  deplorable  effect  of  sin — such  its  desolating  influence 
on  the  soul  of  the  sinning  one,  that  he  is  thrown  by  it,  like 
the  fallen  angels,  in  the  very  nature  of  his  mental  and  moral  con¬ 
stitution,  beyond  the  possibility  of  repentance  and  reformation,  bj7- 
an}^  and  all  instrumentality  proper  to  be  used  with  him  to  reform 


133 


him,  so  that  the  final  hardness  and  impenitence  of  such  becomes 
another  inevitable  exigency  of  a  moral  system. 

3.  They  cannot  be  annihilated  j  for  that  would  remand  the 
universe  to  the  same  condition  as  before,  with  no  moral  beings  in 
existence  but  the  Almighty ;  and  then  another  race  of  moral  be¬ 
ings,  if  created,  would  also  sin  as  their  predecessors  had  done, 
and  for  the  same  reason,  and  also  because  nothing  better  could 
be  done  for  them,  either  in  respect  to  nature  or  circumstances, 
than  was  done  for  the  fallen  angels. 

To  start  a  moral  system,  therefore,  and  at  the  same  time  an¬ 
nihilate  the  sinful  is  impossible.  But  we  are  assuming  that  a 
moral  system  is,  in  some  way,  to  exist.  Therefore, 

4.  The  first  sinful  beings  must  be  made  an  example  of  as  the 
only  way  to  have  a  moral  system  at  all.  Their  sinful  conduct  and 
the  consequent  punishment  must  be  held  up  as  a  warning  before 
other  and  future  races,  as  the  only  possible  way  to  deter  them 
from  a  similar  rebellion  ;  and  therefore,  the  proper  penalty  of 
God’s  great  Law  must  be  executed  upon  them,  and  they  must  be 
“punished  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord,  and  the  glory  of  his  power.” 

5.  There  must,  therefore,  be  a  place — a  prison-house, 
where  that  penalty  may  be  executed.  Also  there  can  be  no  better 
— no  more  common  sense  arrangement,  than  that  all  the  wicked¬ 
ness  of  the  universe  should  be  gathered  into  it  as  into  a  great  re¬ 
ceptacle  for  all  its  moral  filthiness  and  abomination.  This  is  the 
“  place”  which  our  Savior  says  was  “  prepared  for  the  Devil  and 
his  angels,”  and  where,  as  the  apostle  declares  “  they  are  reserved 
in  everlasting  chains  ;”  and  to  which  also  the  wicked  of  this  world 
shall  be  banished  at  the  final  judgment,  when  the  King  shall  say 
to  those  on  the  left-hand,  “  depart  ye  cursed  into  everlasting  fire, 
prepared  for  the  Devil  and  his  angels.”  (Matt.  25 :  41.) 

Hell,  therefore,  becomes  another  of  the  inevitable  and  terrible 
exigencies  of  a  moral  system — a  place  which  must  exist  if  a  moral 
system  is  to  exist ;  and  the  dreadful  dilemma  of  the  caption  re¬ 
mains — Sell  or  no  moral  system. 

Sec.  7.  Benevolence  of  the  Moral  System. 

Why,  then,  have  a  moral  system  at  all  ?  If  it  be  distinctly 
forseen  that  such  a  system  will  be  endlessly  burdened  with  suf¬ 
fering,  why  not  dispense  with  it  altogether?  Answer  :  Holiness 
and  consequent  happiness  are  as  valuable  in  the  way  of  good,  as 
sin  and  consequent  misery  are  bad  in  the  way  of  evil ;  and  the  one 
as  important  to  be  secured  as  the  other  to  be  prevented. 

But,  furthermore,  the  conditions  of  the  future  universe  will  be, 
to  all  appearance,  these  :  On  the  one  hand  there  will  be  endless 
suffering  from  the  incursions  of  sin,  yet  not  increasing  in  number 


\ 


134 


or  magnitude ;  on  tlie  other,  endless  holiness  and  happiness,  in¬ 
creasing  endlessly.  And  now,  would  it  be  benevolent  in  the  Al¬ 
mighty  to  sacrifice  the  holiness  and  happiness  of  an  endless  uni¬ 
verse,  endlessly  enlarging,  to  the  wickedness  of  the  comparative¬ 
ly  few  who  choose  rebellion,  and  who  alone  are  responsible  for 
their  sufferings'?  This  would  be  contrary  to  the  commonest  dic¬ 
tates  of  common  sense.  Common  sense  decides,  in  all  human 
affairs,  that  a  man  should  ever  do  that  which  is,  on  the  whole ,  for 
the  best.  Why  should  not  God  ? 

This  the  present  theory  represents  him  as  doing — doing  ever 
the  next  best  thing,  and  working  ever  in  the  direction  of  holiness 
and  salvation.  To  secure  the  obedience  and  salvation  of  the  fallen 
angels  was  impossible.  They  all  rebelled,  notwithstanding  the 
best  that  could  be  done  for  them. 

In  the  case  of  mankind  a  part  only  can  be  led  to  repentance ; 
and  God  saves  every  one  whom  he  wisely  can  up  to  the  very  last 
unit.  I  say  he  saves  all  whom  he  vrisely  can.  This  is  certain. 
Perhaps  he  saves  all  whom  he  safely  can.  Perhaps  if  he  saved 
even  one  more  than  he  does,  he  would  just  so  far  tempt  the  moral 
universe  to  presume  on  his  leniency,  and  dare  rebellion.  There 
may  be  a  limit  beyond  which  it  is  not  safe  to  show  mercy  to  the 
rebellious.  There  may  be  an  exact  point  beyond  which  the  exer¬ 
tion  of  those  peculiar  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  necessary  to 
secure  repentance  would  begin  to  sap  the  foundations  of  moral 
government,  and  endanger  the  welfare  and  happiness  of  the  whole 
moral  universe ;  and  beyond  that  point  even  infinite  benevolence 
must  not  pass. 

The  unfallen  angels  have  all  been  kept  true  to  God  and  duty, 
creating  thus  the  strong  probability, even  the  almost  certainty, that 
a  point  will  eventually  be  reached  when  all  newly  created  beings 
can  be  confirmed  in  obedience  to  God  without  the  personal  expe¬ 
rience  of  transgression,  thus  making  the  moral  universe  to  be  ad¬ 
vancing  ever  in  the  direction  of  holiness  and  happiness,  and  in 
the  only  way  possible. 

In  this  view,  a  period  will  eventually  be  reached  when  all  the 
sin  and  misery  of  the  universe  will  become  an  infinitisimal  as  com¬ 
pared  with  its  holiness  and  happiness;  so  that  with  all  this  grievous 
drawback  of  endless  sin  and  misery,  the  present  moral  system 
will  appear  to  be  just  infinitely  better  than  none  at  all,  and  God’s 
character  be  vindicated  before  all  worlds  as  beiug  tbat  of  infinite 
and  perfect  benevolence. 

Sec.  8.  Objections. 

The  objections  to  the  Doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment  thus 
far  noticed,  have  reference  to  misapprehensions  of  the  position 
we,  as  a  race,  occupy  in  the  general  system  of  the  universe — to 


135 


misapprehensions  of  the  nature  of  sin,  and  of  the  Divine  preven¬ 
tion  of  it,  to  erroneous  views  of  the  design  of  temptation,  of  the 
connection  of  the  soul  with  a  physical  body,  of  the  conditions  of 
infancy,  and  of  the  parental  relation.  Also  we  have  noticed,  the 
doctrine  so  generally  prevalent,  that  the  evil  consequences  of  sin 
will  be  removed,  in  the  future  world,  by  some  process  of  Resto¬ 
ration. 

Thus  it  appears  that  almost  the  entire  work  thus  far  has  been 
aimed  at  removing  objections  to  the  doctrine  in  question,  though 
not  always  taking  this  specific  form.  A  few  of  the  more  common 
objections  remain  yet  to  be  considered  specifically,  and  a  few 
which  have  already  been  adverted  to,  will  be  noticed  again  briefly. 

1.  The  common  stereotyped  objection  accepted  by  multi¬ 
tudes  as  a  finality  to  all  reasoning,  is — “  Would  you  punish  your 
child  eternally  ?  and  is  not  God  more  kind  to  his  children  than 
any  earthly  parent  ?  ” 

The  fallacy  of  this  objection  is  that  it  contemplates  only 
God’s  parental  relation,  and  excludes  the  equally  obvious  one  of 
Moral  Governor.  The  objection  carried  out  wrould  amount  to  this 
— If  an  earthly  parent  wTere  also  a  judge,  and  his  own  son  were 
brought  before  him  convicted  of  wilful  and  deliberate  murder,  he 
should  sacrifice  the  welfare  of  the  whole  community  to  parental 
fondness,  and  refuse,  because  lie  is  his  child,  to  execute  upon  him 
the  penalty  of  the  law.  All  are  God’s  children,  and  the  moral 
universe  a  single  family;  and  the  real,  practical  question  is — 
Whether  he  shall  sacrifice  the  welfare  of  the  whole  family  to  the 
inexcusable  wickedness  of  the  comparatively  few  who  rebel 
against  him. 

Of  course  no  man  would  punish  his  own  child  eternally,  for 
there  is  no  necessity  for  it.  No  such  tremendous  necessities  en¬ 
viron  the  management  of  a  single  little  family  for  a  few  days  on 
earth,  as  appertain  to  the  vast  empire  of  Jehovah,  extending  over 
all  wrorlds,  and  whose  foundations  of  law  and  penalty  must  be 
laid  deep  enough  and  strong  enough  to  stand  the  pressure  of 
endless  ages,  and  bear  up  an  endless  universe.  It  is  these  infinite 
and  eternal  necessities  which  determine  the  duration  of  punish¬ 
ment  in  the  moral  government  of  God.* 

*Some  object  to  this  argument  from  the  necessities  of  Moral  Govern¬ 
ment  as  being  superficial,  and  prefer  to  find  the  ultimate  necessity  for 
endless  punishment  in  the  demands  of  God’s  infinite  nature.  They  hold 
that,  apart  from  all  considerations  of  moral  government  over  the  universe, 
God’s  infinite  holiness  and  self-respect  necessitates  endless  punishment 
for  transgression;  so  that  were  there  but  one  created  being  in  the  universe 
and  he  a  rebel,  God  would  still  be  under  a  moral  necessity  of  either  anni¬ 
hilating  him,  or  inflicting  upon  him  limitless  penalty.  Undoubtedly 
there  is  a  great  truth  here;  but  less  obvious  and  convincing,  it  is  believed 
to  the  common  mind,  than  is  the  argument  from  the  necessities  of  a  Moral 
Universe. 


136 


The  real  point  of  this  objection  however  is,  that  the  endless 
suffering  of  any  of  God’s  intelligent  creatures,  is  irreconcilable 
with  his  benevolence.  But  the  existence  of  limited  suffering  mili¬ 
tates  as  truly — we  will  not  say  as  strongly — against  the  benevo¬ 
lence  of  God  as  unlimited.  And  if  suffering  be  indispensable  in 
the  management  of  the  universe  for  a  single  day,  then  may  it  be 
also  indispensable  for  another  day,  or  for  any  number  of  days  ; 
and  he  who  presses  the  objection  to  its  last  result,  must  assume 
all  suffering  to  be  irreconcilable  with  the  Divine  benevolence  ;  and 
as  suffering  exists,  therefore  God  is  malevolent ;  and  then  where 
are  we? 

But  in  respect  to  this  matter  of  endlessness ,  it  should  ever  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  universe  to  be  protected  is  an  endless  univ¬ 
erse  ;  that  law  is  endless,  and  government  endless,  and  that  the 
saiictions  of  Law  must  be  as  eternal  as  the  Law  itself ;  and, 
therefore,  that  the  endlessness  of  punishment  is  a  characteristic 
of  it  absolutely  inseparable  from  the  eternal  stability  of  the  Divine 
Administration. 

2.  One  has  been  heard  to  say — “  If  my  friends  are  to  be 
lost,  I  should  desire  to  be  with  them This  assumes  that  com¬ 
panions  in  the  world  of  retribution  may  be  a  comfort  to  each  other, 
which  is  impossible.  Friends  who  have  been  the  most  intimate 
on  earth,  will  only  be  incited  there  to  mutual  reproaches  for  hav¬ 
ing  confirmed  each  other  in  their  common  impenitence. 

Dives  had  no  wish  that  his  “  five  brethren”  should  a  come  into 
the  same  place  of  torment”  with  himself,  very  likely  for  one  thing, 
because  he  feared  their  reproaches  for  his  own  wicked  worldly 
example.  Between  those  who  are  lost,  no  affections  of  earth  can 
be  perpetuated.  The  parent  will  shrink  from  the  sight  of  his  lost 
children,  from  the  bitter  remembrance  that  they  were  led  to  de¬ 
struction  through  his  influence  ;  and  the  lost  children  will  shrink 
from  the  sight  of  their  godless  parents  who  made  no  efforts  for 
their  salvation. 

We  love  the  members  of  our  own  family  here  on  earth,  on 
the  ground  of  natural  affection,  irrespective  of  character,  and 
oftentimes  in  spite  of  a  very  wicked  character,  as  in  the  case  of  a 
mother’s  affection  for  a  profligate  son  ;  and  we  admire  and  love 
natural  amiability  and  benevolent  impulses  even  when  witnessed 
in  wicked  men.  But  when  all  earthly  relations  and  conditions 
have  ceased,  and  that  wicked  character,  which  showed  itself  in  a 
prayerless  life  and  a  godless  example,  shall  appear  in  its  real  de¬ 
formity  and  hatefulness,  as  it  will  in  the  future  world,  unrelieved 
by  any  graceful  exhibitions  of  constitutional  amiability,  then,  if 
holy  ourselves,  we  must  be  repelled  by  it  even  as  God  is.  A 
Christian  can  no  more  love  a  wicked  character  in  Heaven  than 
God  can.  There  can  be  no  friendship  therefore,  in  the  future 
world  except  among  the  holy ;  and  the  wish  expressed  to  be  with 


137 


friends  who  are  lost,  and  are  enemies  of  God,  is  unnatural  and 
monstrous.  God’s  friendship  is  worth  infinitely  more  than  that 
of  all  our  earthly  friends,  or  the  universe  besides. 

3.  “  But  how  can  I  be  happy  even  in  Heaven,  knowing  that 
my  friends  are  suffering ?”  Answer  :  In  the  same  way  that  God 
will  be,  who  regards  our  friends  far  more  than  we  do.  He  is 
blessed  and  ever  will  be,  in  the  certain  knowledge  that  the  best 
has  been  done  by  him  that  could  be  to  prevent  both  the  sin  and 
the  suffering  of  every  individual ;  and  this  will  be  an  eternal  and 
sufficient  foundation  of  satisfaction  to  God  and  all  beings  who 
sympathize  with  him.  Good  men  are  happy  in  this  life  notwith¬ 
standing  the  jails,  penitentiaries  and  dungeons  which  are  confin¬ 
ing  the  wicked ;  far  happier  than  they  would  be  with  the  knowl¬ 
edge  that  this  class  of  persons  were  running  at  large,  to  work  out 
their  wickedness  unchecked;  and  so  it  will  be  an  eternal  ground 
of  satisfaction  in  heaven  to  know  that  the  wicked,  whatever  may 
have  been  their  relations  to  us,  are  put  beyond  the  possibility  of 
doing  further  mischief  to  the  interests  of  God’s  kingdom. 

All  this  class  of  objections  however  are  unfair,  for  the  reason 
that  they  are  ever  regarding  sin  and  its  appropriate  punishment 
solely  from  the  emotional  side  of  our  natures — appealing  to  our 
susceptibilities,  and  our  natural  repugnance  to  suffering,  and  giv¬ 
ing  no  fair  play  to  the  suggestions  of  reason  and  judgment.  It 
is  as  if  a  man  should  condemn  a  surgical  operation  that  saves  life 
on  account  of  th q  pain  it  occasions.  Or  visiting  the  cell  of  the 
deliberate  murderer,  should  bemoan  his  separation  from  his  family, 
and  shudder  at  his  gloomy  surroundings — the  bolts  and  bars  and 
massive  walls  of  his  dungeon,  and  condemn  the  government  that 
sent  him  there ;  all  unmindful  the  while  of  the  stupendous  guilt 
of  the  murderer,  his  reckless  sacrifice  of  human  life,  and  his  inva¬ 
sion  of  the  well-being  of  society,  and  especially  unmindful  of  the 
absolute  necessity  for  his  confinement,  lest  he  assail  still  more 
recklessly  the  general  welfare. 

4.  “  The  sins  of  so  short  a  period  as  human  life ,  cannot 
merit  an  eternity  of  punishment,”  A  recent  writer  very  concisely 
and  satisfactorily  answers  this  objection  thus — “  Human  law  never 
measures  penalty  by  the  time  occupied  in  crime.  One  second  suf¬ 
fices  for  a  young  man  of  twenty  to  pull  the  trigger  which  ensures 
a  murder;  and  the  law  imprisons  him  for  life.  Is  that  just?  Cer¬ 
tainly,  replies  a  common-sense  community.  The  time  occupied 
in  the  crime  is  no  element  in  the  guilt  whatever,  any  more  than 
the  color  or  material  of  the  criminal’s  clothes,  or  the  price  paid 
for  the  pistol.  The  malignity  of  his  purpose,  the  horrible  result 
of  his  act,  and  the  influence  of  such  deeds  to  deprave  public 
morals,  and  to  destroy  law,  order,  safety  and  happiness,  are  the 
elements  which  are  taken  into  the  account  in  affixing  the  penalty. 
This  is  plain  enough  in  human  legislation ;  why  do  men  stumble 


138 


at  the  application  of  the  same  principle  in  the  Divine  government  ? 
How  unjust,  exclaims  the  universalist,  to  exclude  a  man  forever 
from  the  glory  and  joy  of  Heaven,  for  the  sins  of  a  short  life  on 
earth?  There  is  the  same  fallacy  as  in  the  other  case.  Time  oc¬ 
cupied  in  commission  is  not  the  measure  of  sin,  but  the  disposi¬ 
tion  of  the  heart,  as  seen  in  the  character  and  tendency  of  the  sel¬ 
fish  principle  which  de  ies  God,  subverts  his  law,  and  tramples 
upon  universal  interests.  The  sinner  who  will  not  be  reclaimed 
by  God’s  patience,  and  Christ’s  dying  love,  during  the  gracious 
probation  allowed  in  this  world,  will  justly  be  pronounced  a  con¬ 
demned  rebel  worthy  of  eternal  separation  from  the  good,  and  of 
confinement  in  the  prison  of  the  universe.”  To  this  we  add,  that 
whenever  the  sin  of  a  moral  being  is  to  the  Omniscient  mind  cer¬ 
tain  and  inveterate,  notwithstanding  all  possible  influences  for  its 
prevention,  a  brief  probation  becomes  correspondingly  merciful. 
For  suppose  such  wicked  men  as  we  see  about  us,  were  allowed 
to  persevere  in  their  abuse  of  God’s  mercy  and  loving  kindness, 
and  in  resistance  to  his  Spirit,  for  ten  thousand  years,  instead  of 
the  ordinary  {probation  of  human  life,  how  immeasurably  more 
dreadful  would  then  be  the  succeeding  eternity.  Doubtless  in 
the  case  of  every  one  who  is  finally  lost,  a  longer  probation  than 
God  gave  him,  would  only  have  resulted  in  an  increase  of  guilt, 
remorse  and  punishment,  and  it  was  an  act  of  mercy  to  him  that 
his  probation  was  not  lengthened. 

5.  “  A.  finite  being  cannot  commit  an  infinite  sin,  and  therefore, 
cannot  deserve  unlimited  punishment.”  This  objection  measures 
the  guilt  and  ill-desert  of  sin  solely  by  the  nature  of  the  sinner. 
Bat  why  is  it  not  as  correctly  measured  by  the  law  that  is  broken, 
the  God  that  is  sinned  against,  and  the  eternal  interests  assailed 
by  it?  This  is  God’s  standard  of  measurement,  as  he  says,  “that 
sin  by  the  commandment  might  become  exceeding  sinful.”  (Rom. 
7  :  13.) 

In  this  case,  the  low  and  inadequate  standard  adopted,  is 
what  makes  unlimited  punishment  appear  inconsistent.  Only  get 
the  standard  of  measurement  correct,  and  sin  rises,  at  once,  to  a 
limitless  magnitude,  even  as  the  law  broken  is  that  of  the  Infinite 
One;  and  unlimited  punishment  becomes  its  only  appropriate 
penalty. 

6.  “All  punishment  is  for  the  reformation  of  the  offender, 
and  cannot  therefore  be  endless.” 

This  view  is  radically  inferior  and  defective,  for  this  would 
make  all  punishment  unjust  except  for  the  single  sin  of  impeni¬ 
tence.  Moreover  this  is  never  the  primary  design  of  punishment, 
even  inhuman  government;  for  the  penalty  for  crime  is  threatened 
beforehand,  with  no  knowledge  of  the  character  of  the  offender, 
or  what  peculiar  treatment  may  be  best  calculated  to  reclaim  him; 
so  that  his  reformation  is  merely  an  incidental  and  secondary 


139 


matter  ;  valuable  of  course,  wherever  it  can  be  secured.  But  the 
primary  design  of  punishment  everywhere,  is  to  uphold  the  majesty 
of  law,  and  secure  the  stability  of  government  for  the  protection 
of  society.  In  the  government  of  God,  it  is  designed  to  express 
his  measureless  estimate  of  his  law,  his  universe  and  himself  ;  and 
to  so  hold  up  the  wickedness  of  transgression  before  all  moral 
beings,  as  to  deter  from  its  commission,  and  thus  secure  the  per¬ 
manence  of  his  moral  administration,  and  the  safety  of  his  intelli¬ 
gent  creation ;  and  in  comparison  with  this,  the  reformation  of 
the  offender,  however  desirable  in  itself,  is  of  vastly  inferior 
consequence. 

Moreover,  the  reformation  of  the  offender  by  mere  punishment, 
is  impossible.  Yery  few  of  our  criminals  are  ever  permanently 
benefitted  by  their  prison  life  ;  and  they  only  leave  the  temporary 
confinement  of  jails  and  penitentiaries,  to  enact  over  again  the 
same  crimes;  and  the  oftener  they  are  incarcerated,  the  harder 
they  become,  till  the  common  phrase  in  our  police  reports — “  an 
old  jail  bird,”  is  only  a  synonym  for  confirmed  and  hopeless 
wickedness. 

Punishment  merely ,  has  neither  power  nor  tendency  even  to 
effect  reformation;  and  there  is  not  an  intimation  in  the  Bible, 
that  the  final  punishment  of  the  wicked  has  any  such  design  or 
tendency.  Indeed,  the  entire  representation  of  the  Bible  is  exactly 
the  opposite  of  this,  namely,  that  their  hatred  and  opposition  to 
God  is  only  intensified  by  punishment ;  “  they  curse  God  and  look 
upward  and  blaspheme  him  because  of  their  plagues.” 

No,  it  takes  all  the  combined  influences  of  the  best  possible 
probation — all  that  mixture  of  love  and  chastisement,  goodness 
and  severity,  and  that  entire  array  of  peculiar  and  providential 
dealings  which  this  world  furnishes,  and  which  God  has  wrought 
into  human  experience,  to  accomplish  the  work  of  reformation 
even  in  a  single  instance ;  and  these  having  been  faithfully  tried 
on  earth,  their  introduction  into  the  future  world  would  be  use¬ 
less. 

7.  “A  progressive  system,  like  ours,  will  cure  itself.”  The 
advocates  of  progression  assume  the  existence  of  sin  to  be  due  to 
the  infancy  of  the  moral  system,  and  the  unavoidable  ignorance 
and  inexperience  of  the  beings  who  compose  it.  Consequently, 
what  is  called  sin  is  rather  error,  infirmity,  misfortune,  and  is,  to 
a  degree,  excusable,  and  only  what  might  be  expected  in  the  cir¬ 
cumstances.  And  furthermore,  they  assume  that,  with  the  progress 
of  the  system,  and  the  development  of  experience  and  intelligence, 
all  moral  disorder  will,  at  length,  be  arrested,  and  the  universe 
become  holy  and  happy. 

First — Anything  called  sin  which  is  yet  properly  due  to  the 
unavoidable  ignorance  of  right  and  wrong,  is  not  sin,  and  has  in 
it  no  element  of  sinfulness;  for  this  unavoidable  ignorance  is  a 


140 


good  and  sufficient  excuse  for  the  resulting  conduct ;  and  that  for 
which  a  good  excuse  can  be  rendered,  cannot  be  sin. 

Secondly — A  progressive  system  may  yet  contain  forever 
both  sin  and  suffering.  The  system  developed  in  these  pages  is 
a  progressive  one,  and  meets  all  the  evidence  of  progression  exist¬ 
ing.  It  commences  with  the  creation  of  matter,  then  reaches  the 
creation  of  a  single  race  of  beings,  and  then  goes  on  expanding 
and  enlarging  endlessly.  No  conceivable  system  can  be  more 
completely  a  progressive  one.  And  yet,  be  it  noticed,  thejooss^- 
bility  of  this  progression  is  made  to  rest  on  the  very  fact  that  sin 
shall,  in  many  cases,  receive  its  appropriate  and  endless  punish¬ 
ment. 

A  progressive  system,  therefore,  does  not  necessarily  result 
in  the  entire  eradication  from  itself  of  sin  and  suffering ;  and, 
although  the  present  system  is  clearly  a  progressive  one,  it  may 
still,  upon  the  ground  of  human  reason,  contain  within  itself  the 
endless  punishment  of  sin. 

8.  The  system  of  Naturalism  assumes  finite  penalty  without 
proof.  It  boldly  asserts  that  all  sin  must  have  its  appropriate 
punishment — that  all  infraction  of  God’s  laws,  whether  physical 
or  moral,  must  be  followed  by  corresponding  penalty. 

Now  could  the  advocates  of  this  system  only  demonstrate  at 
this  point,  that  the  appropriate  penalty  for  violation  of  God’s 
great  moral  law,  is  merely  finite  and  temporary ,  like  the  penalty 
of  physical  law,  the  ground  would  be  comparatively  clear  and  sat¬ 
isfactory;  but  it  omits  to  do  this,  and  leaves  a  terrible  perhaps 
that  it  is  not.  The  system,  too,  as  a  whole,  is  burdened  with  the 
most  serious  inconsistencies.  Thus  it  asserts  that  the  Divine 
plan  embraces  only  justice ;  that  no  mercy  has  ever  entered  into 
it ;  whereas  mercy  is  written  on  the  heavens,  and  every  man  who 
prays  for  pardon  either  to  God  or  idols,  assumes  it. 

It  says  that  no  atonement — no  system  of  expiation,  is  possi¬ 
ble,  when  the  world’s  great  hunger  is  for  expiation ;  and  every 
nation  on  earth  is  assuming  its  possibility,  and  seeking  in  its  own 
way,  by  sacrifices  or  fasting,  by  penance  or  pilgrimage,  or  self¬ 
infliction  in  some  form,  to  reach  it. 

It  sees  nothing  in  this  world  but  rigid  law  and  penalty, when 
God  makes  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  as  well  as  on  the  good, 
and  sends  his  gentle  rain  alike  upon  the  just  and  the  unjust. 

And  then,  as  if  elated  with  its  own  moral  hardihood,  and 
proud  of  its  superiority  to  the  poor,  trembling  sinner  who  fears 
“  the  wrath  to  come,”  it  confidently  says — “  I  ayn  willing  to  be 
punished  all  I  deserve  to  be”  Aye,  but  it  is  very  careful  to  as¬ 
sume,  at  that  point,  that  the  appropriate  punishment  of  sin  is 
only  limited  and  temporary,  when,  as  we  have  seen  it  may  not  be; 
and  in  which  case  a  man  might  not  be  as  ready  to  insist  on  strict 
justice,  and  reject  the  possibility  of  mercy,  and  scout  the  Atone- 


ment,  and  push  away  from  him  the  kind  offer  of  deliverance  from 
both  sin  and  punishment  through  the  Saviour,  by  whom  God  can 
be  just,  and  yet  justify  him  that  believeth  in  Jesus, 

All  such  superficial  thinkers  upon  the  great  problems  of  Di¬ 
vine  Government  and  Eternal  Justice  and  Mercy, should  propose, 
each  one  to  himself,  questions  like  this — “  Am  I  sure  that  this 
amount  of  suffering*  and  penalty  which  I  have  assumed  is  to  fol¬ 
low  my  sin,  will  adequately  measure  the  wickedness  of  that  sin  ? 
Will  it  correspond  with  the  infinite  majesty  of  the  Law  I  have 
violated  ;  with  the  dignity  and  greatness  and  glory  of  the  Law¬ 
giver  against  whom  I  have  sinned  ;  and  am  I  sure  that  such  a 
finite  penalty,  as  am  I  contemplating,  would  protect  sufficiently 
the  interests  and  welfare  of  a  universe  extending  to  all  worlds 
and  through  all  ages  ?  ” 

Now  such  questions  honestly  put,  will  speedily  show  a  man 
that,  very  likely,  it  will  not  be  safe  for  him  to  insist  upon  strict 
justice,  for  that  may  result  in  his  eternal  banishment  from  God. 
He  cannot  prove  that  it  will  not ;  and  there  are  weighty  consid¬ 
erations  for  his  fearing  that  it  will.  And  it  were  well  for  him, 
therefore,  to  consider  whether  there  may  not  be  some  way  of  de¬ 
liverance  from  the  appropriate  consequences  of  sin — of  his  own 
sin ;  and  whether  he  is  sure  that  the  Gospel  plan  of  salvation  for 
the  sinful,  may  not  have  emanated  from  God,  and  Jesus  Christ, 
after  all,  be  “the  only  name  under  heaven  given  among  men 
whereby  we  must  be  saved.” 

He  should  consider,  also,  how  fully  the  Gospel  scheme  car¬ 
ries  with  itself  its  own  demonstrable  evidence  of  its  Divine  ori¬ 
gin.  Take,  for  instance,  the  comprehensive  statement  of  it  in 
Is.  53:  6 — “  All  we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray  ;  we  have  turned 
every  one  to  his  own  way  ;  and  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  in¬ 
iquity  of  us  all ;  ”  in  which  the  proposition  is  to  lay  the  sins  of 
all  the  men  who  have  ever  lived,  or  who  may  yet  live,  upon  a  sin¬ 
gle  individual.  Whence  did  such  a  scheme  originate  ?  It  must 
have  had  either  a  human  or  a  divine  origin.  But  what  finite  mind 
could  have  devised  such  a  plan  ?  What  finite  being  could  have 
been  found  to  sustain  such  a  burden?  What  finite  being 
would  have  authority  to  propose  such  a  scheme  with  any  hope  of 
its  acknowledgement?  No  one  can  seriously  contemplate  the 
above  statement  without  seeing  that  its  magnitude  and  mysteri¬ 
ousness,  its  utter  incomprehensibility  even,  in  many  of  its  vital 
aspects,  lift  it  at  once  above  the  plane  of  human  thought,  and 
render  the  assumption  of  its  human  origin  a  manifest  absurdity  ; 
and  if  its  human  origin  be  manifestly  impossible,  then  is  lie 
bound  to  accept  it  as  Divine. 

9.  It  seems  proper  in  this  connection  to  consider  briefly  the 
doctrine  of  the  Annihilation  of  the  wicked.  All  the  passages  in 
the  Bible  adduced  in  proof  of  this  doctrine,  can  be  better  ex- 


142 


plained  on  ctlier  principles — either  as  designed  to  show,  by 
strong  figurative  expressions,  the  utter  extinction  of  all  ihepoiver 
of  the  wicked  in  their  opposition  to  God,  and  in  their  attempt  to 
crush  his  chosen  people  Israel ;  or,  to  depict,  by  the  most  fearful 
terms  possible,  the  terrors  of  God’s  wrath  in  the  future  world. 
For  example — 

“  The  enemies  of  the  Lord  shall  be  as  the  fat  of  rams ;  they 
shall  consume;  into  smoke  shall  they  consume  away.”  (Ps.  37  : 
20.)  This  Psalm  was  written  for  the  encouragement  of  God’s 
Israel  when  exposed  to  the  rage  and  malice  of  their  enemies,  and 
contains  not  a  single  necessary  reference  to  a  future  state ;  and 
this  particular  declaration  implies  that  the  enemies  of  God,  and 
those  opposed  to  him,  and  working  against  him,  and  especially 
those  assailing  his  chosen  people,  should  have  their  power  utterly 
annihilated,  and  be  of  no  more  account  than  the  smoke  of  a  burnt 
sacrifice. 

“They  shall  be  as  though  they  had  not  been.”  (Obad.  16.) 
This  is  taken  from  the  vision  of  the  prophet  respecting  Edom  ; 
and  is  the  threatening  of  destruction  against  the  Edomites  and 
their  land  for  their  unkindness  to  Israel,  and  has  no  necessary  or 
probable  reference  to  the  future  world. 

“  Who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction  from 
the  presence  of  the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his  power.”  (2  Thes.  1:7.) 
And  what  is  endless  punishment  but  the  “everlasting  destruction” 
of  all  happiness  and  hope  and  all  well-being,  as  well  as  eternal  ban¬ 
ishment  from  God.  The  passage  can  be  made  to  mean  with 
certainty,  no  more  than  this. 

That  immortality  is  a  peculiar  gift  to  the  righteous  alone,  on 
the  ground  of  repentance  and  faith,  and  does  not  belong  to  mind 
by  virtue  of  its  nature,  is  neither  asserted  nor  implied  in  a  single 
passage  in  the  Word  of  God. 

“But  what  is  the  propriety  of  calling  the  doom  of  the  sinner 
the  ‘  second  death]  if  it  be  not  the  extinction  of  being  ?  ”  An¬ 
swer — 

In  the  expressions  death,  destruction,  chains,  fire  and  brim¬ 
stone,  and  the  undying  worm,  inspiration  is  using  the  most  fear¬ 
ful  terms  men  know  of,  to  express  the  terribleness  of  Hell ;  even 
as  the  pearly  gates  and  golden  streets  are  used  to  depict  the 
glory  of  Heaven  ;  and  as  natural  death  is  the  termination  of  life 
on  earth,  and  ends  all  its  joys  and  expectations  and  hopes  and 
plans,  and  ever  stands  before  men  the  darkest  and  most  dreary 
and  dreadful  of  all  earthly  experiences,  so,  on  account  of  the 
darkness,  dreariness  and  dreadfulness  of  the  sinner’s  doom,  and 
the  utter  extinction  of  all  happiness  and  hope  to  him,  it  is  appro¬ 
priately  termed  the  “second  death ”  without  necessarily  implying 
at  all  the  extinction  of  existence. 

“  But,”  it  is  urged,  “  the  meaning  of  the  scripture  is  that  the 


113 


consequences  or  results  of  the  sinner’s  punishment  are  eternal,  and 
not  the  punishment  itself.  Annihilation  is  an  endless  result  of 
punishment.”  Answer :  There  is  indeed  a  manifest  distinction 
between  punishment,  and  the  results  of  punishment ;  and  the 
annihilate  onist  finds  no  difficulty  in  making  it  clear  to  the  simplest 
apprehension.  The  scriptures  also,  would  doubtless  find  no  diffi¬ 
culty  in  making  the  same  distinction  did  they  attempt  it.  But 
they  do  not,  and  speak  only  of  the  punishment  as  eternal. 

There  are  no  stronger  arguments  for  this  belief  than  these 
which  have  been  noticed,  and  the  doctrine  of  annihilation  rests  on 
no  defensible  foundation. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  occasion  of  sin  be  endless  in  a  uni¬ 
verse  eternally  expanding,  as  it  certainly  may  be,  and  manifested 
perdition  be  indispensable  to  deter  newly-created  mind  forever 
from  daring  the  experiment  of  transgression,  then  the  annihilation 
of  the  wicked  is  impossible ;  for  either  their  warning  example 
must  be  perpetuated,  or  else  the  universe  must  revolve  in  an  end¬ 
less  cycle  of  creation,  sin  and  annihilation,  and  no  substantial 
results  of  holiness  and  happiness  be  secured.  This,  at  least,  is  pos¬ 
sible,  even  upon  the  ground  of  human  reason ;  while  the  scripture 
testimony  to  the  endlessness  of  punishment  is  conclusive  and 
unanswerable. 

10.  “  To  create  beings  knoioing  that  they  will  be  lost  cannot 
be  benevolent.”  Answer — 

1.  If  it  were  foreseen  that,  in  a  system  of  moral  beings  all 
would  sin  and  be  eternally  lost,  the  adoption  of  such  a  system 
would  not  be  a  benevolent  act. 

2.  Were  it  foreseen  that  but  a  small  fraction  would  sin  and 
be  lost,  so  that,  o  i  the  whole,  the  good  resulting  from  the  system 
icould  infinitely  exceed  the  evil ,  the  adoption  of  such  a  system 
would  be  benevolent.  Because  holiness  and  consequent  happiness 
are  as  valuable  yu  the  way  of  good,  as  sin  and  consequent  misery 
are  bad  in  the  way  of  evil ;  and  the  one  as  important  to  be  secured 
as  the  other  to  be  prevented.  So  men  reason.  In  all  human 
experience  and  relations,  we  offset  the  good  against  the  evil ;  and 
if,  in  any  plan,  the  former  greatly  preponderates,  we  adopt  the 
plan  as  a  whole  on  the  common-sense  principle  that  it  pays.  Such 
is  the  peculiarity  of  the  present  system,  that  while  it  involves  the 
endless  suffering  of  a  limited,  number  of  moral  beings,  it  yet 
secures  the  endless  happiness  of  an  unlimited  number  ;  so  that 
in  the  long  range  of  eternity,  the  evils  of  the  system  as  compared 
with  the  good  resulting  from  it  will  become  infinitessimal,  and 
therefore,  its  adoption  the  dictate  of  benevolence. 

Still  the  question  returns — How  is  the  Endless  Perdition  of 
even  a  single  individual  consistent  with  the  benevolence  of  God? 
Answer:  Only  on  the  ground  of  his  having  done  all  for  the  salva¬ 
tion  of  that  individual  that  could  possibly  be  done ;  so  that  the 


144 


resources  of  Omnipotence  have  been  exhausted  in  his  behalf,  and 
the  infliction  of  threatened  penalty  has  become  an  unavoidable 
necessity.  This  is  the  only  satisfactory  answer ;  and  any  system 
not  fairly  reaching  this  point,  is  to  be  regarded  as  worthless  for 
the  vindication  of  the  Divine  Benevolence  in  the  endless  punish¬ 
ment  of  the  wicked. 

11.  It  is  objected  to  our  hypothesis  that  it  involves  the  sac¬ 
rifice  of  one  class  of  moral  beings  for  the  benefit  of  another. 

This  is  carricature.  We  never  speak  thus  when  the  disobedient 
scholar  in  school  is  punished,  or  when  the  murderer  expiates  his 
crime  upon  the  gallows.  True  it  is,  however,  that  all  just  pun¬ 
ishment  for  wrong  doing  inflicted  by  human  law,  does,  as  a  mat¬ 
ter  of  fact,  tend  to  deter  others  from  a  similar  course  ;  that  the 
majesty  of  the  law  is  sustained,  future  obedience  rendered  more 
probable,  or  even  certain,  and  the  general  welfare,  whether  of  the 
school  or  the  community,  is  thereby  secured.  Abo,  that  in  the 
government  of  God,  inflicted  penalty  may  secure  the  eternal  obe¬ 
dience  and  welfare  of  the  universe.  But  the  idea  that  the  viola- 
ters  of  law  in  human  governments,  when  incurring  just  punish¬ 
ment,  are  sacrificed  to  the  general  good  in  any  obnoxious  sense, 
is  never  thought  of.  The  fact  is — and  this  would  be  the  proper 
mode  of  stating  it — that  the  transgressors  having,  in  each  case, 
wickedly  assailed  rightful  authority,  they  rightly  incur  the  pen¬ 
alty  ;  that  having  arrayed  themselves  against  law  and  govern¬ 
ment,  either  they  or  the  government  must  suffer  for  it ;  one  or  the 
other  must  succumb  ;  even  in  the  grand  necessities  of  God’s  per¬ 
fect  government,  when  the  sinner  assails  this,  either  he  or  the 
government  must  be  utterly  ruined,  unless  God  interpose,  as  he 
has  in  this  world,  with  some  infinite  and  mysterious  plan  of  par¬ 
don. 

The  truth  is,  not  that  one  class  of  beings  is  sacrificed  for  the 
benefit  of  another,  but  that  the  wicked  are  sacrificed  only  to  save 
the  great  moral  government  of  God  over  his  universe  from  con¬ 
tempt  and  ruin. 

12.  It  is  objected  that  the  infliction  of  endless  penalty  ren¬ 
ders  the  character  of  the  Almighty  unlovely  and  repulsive,  and 
therefore,  the  doctrine  cannot  be  true. 

It  is  seldom  that  this  point  is  more  forcibly  treated  than  by 
Rev.  R.  S.  Sborrs,  D.  D.,  upon  the  expression  of  the  scripture — 
“  Our  God  is  a  consuming  fire ;  ”  as  quoted  in  the  Advance  of 
May  29,  1873,  of  which  the  following  is  an  abstract : 

“  To  some  this  sentence  appears  so  objectionable  that  they 
absolutely  deny  it.  Our  God,  they  say,  is  ail  gentleness  and  wis¬ 
dom,  grace  and  beauty.  He  reveals  himself  to  us  in  the  beauti¬ 
ful  and  benign  aspects  of  nature,  in  the  quiet  and  beautiful  pro¬ 
gress  of  society,  and  in  the  silent  and  beneficent  forces  working 
through  its  great  frame.  Our  God  reveals  himself  to  us  in  Jesus 


145 


of  Nazareth,  who  is  his  best  representative  on  earth,  full  of  grace 
and  truth,  comforting  the  mourning,  taking  up  little  children  in 
his  arms  and  blessing  them,  and  ever  teaching  in  parables  full  of 
beauty  and  the  grace  of  nature.  This  is  our  God,  and  if  your  God 
is  a  'k  consuming  fire,”  we  will  have  none  of  him.  Tear  out  this 
obnoxious  text  from  the  Scripture !  It  controverts  reason, 
makes  faith  absurd,  makes  glad  obedience  to  him  a  matter  impos¬ 
sible. 

Well,  this  is  one  way  of  treating  the  matter.  And  if  there  is 
any  thing  in  this  other  representation  of  God  which  is  inconsist¬ 
ent  with  these  beneficent  revelations  of  him,  we  will  reverently 
lay  this  aside  as  containing  a  truth  as  yet  unintelligible  to  us, and 
for  the  full  understanding  of  which  we  must  wait  till  the  higher 
life  of  the  future  makes  it  plain  to  our  souls.  But  is  it  irrecon¬ 
cilable  ?  Is  it  not  true  that  because  God  is  wisdom  and  gentle¬ 
ness  and  love  and  peace,  that  therefore,  he  is,  to  those  essentially 
opposed  to  him  in  spirit,  a  consuming  fire,”  and  that  he  must 
be  so  by  the  very  constitution  of  his  being  ?  How  numerous  are 
illustrations  of  this  principle  ? 

Take  the  enlightened  conscience,  and  if  you  wrong  its  prompt¬ 
ings,  how  remorse  turns  upon  the  soul  like  a  scorpion  stinging 
itself !  Take  love,  the  mightiest  power  of  the  universe,  and  which 
is  the  inspiration  of  every  thing  that  is  best  in  the  human  con¬ 
duct  ;  take  love  in  its  purest  from,  the  love  of  the  mother  for  her 
child.  There  is  nothing  but  sweetness,  pathos,  beauty  in  that. 
Suppose  her  purely,  tenderly  nurtured  boy  comes  in  contact  with 
a  vicious  companion  who  tries  to  teach  him  obscenity,  blasphemy, 
theft  and  falsehood.  One  day  the  mother’s  heart  is  grieved  by 
hearing  some  word  of  profanity  from  his  lips  ;  she  remonstrates 
with  the  vicious  lad.  But  if  he  continues  in  his  endeavors  to  con¬ 
taminate  her  child,  is  that  mother’s  heart  patient  and  cool  under 
the  injury  ?  or  do.*  s  her  love  flame  into  wrath,  and  a  moral  indig¬ 
nation,  as  tremendous  as  the  love  has  been — a  love  turning  to  a 
wrath,  which,  if  it  should  utter  itself  in  appropriate  manifestation, 
would  blaze  with  lightnings  on  the  path  of  that  demoralizing 
scoundrel  ?  Love  has  a  side  of  wrath,  and  is  a  consuming  flame 
by  its  very  nature  when  turned  against  that  which  resists  it  and 
is  alien  to  it.  Every  force  in  the  universe,  and  everything  great 
and  conserving  in  the  nature  and  soul  of  man  becomes  such  a  fire 
when  threatened  by  that  which  is  opposed  to  it  The  greatest 
men  have  been  those  who  have  shown  this  the  most  Cromwell, 
Luther,  Pascal,  St.  John,  St.  Paul,  and  more  terribly  and  mightily 
than  all,  Christ  himself.  With  what  withering  denunciations  he 
condemned  whatever  w^as  false  and  ugly  in  character!  What  a 
curse  wras  that  pronounced  upon  the  offending  cities  of  Bethsaida 
and  Chorazin,  and  the  worldly  and  conceited  Pharisees !  Was 

7 


146 


the  heart  of  Christ  less  full  of  tenderness  and  truth  because  it  was 
a  flame  of  lire  when  he  confronted  the  unbelief  and  pride  and 
worldly  ambition  of  those  who  would  resist  and  destroy  his  good 
works  f  And  so  it  is  that  God  over  all,  who  is  represented  to  us 
in  Christ, and  in  nature  and  the  highest  soul  of  man,  is  a  consum¬ 
ing  fire.  Blot  that  out  ?  You  may  tear  it  out  from  your  Bible, 
but  you  cannot  tear  it  out  from  the  universe.” 

13.  The  dreadful  imagery  which  the  Bible  employs  in  de¬ 
picting  future  punishment  is  often  objected  to.  Answer : 

Nothing  can  be  more  absurd  than  to  assume  that  the  Bible 
language  respecting  Heaven  and  Hell  should  be  taken  literally. 
Because  in  using  this  imagery,  the  Bible  takes  the  only  possible 
method  of  conveying  to  our  minds  correct  impressions  of  things 
unseen.  Things  unseen  must  be  described,  if  at  all,  through  the 
medium  of  familiar  objects.  Heaven,  therefore,  is  represented 
with  pearly  gates,  streets  of  gold,  and  walls  of  precious  stones, 
meaning  only  to  portray  it  as  a  place  of  superlative  glory  and 
blessedness ;  of  which  however,  such  imagery  could  give  but  a 
feeble  representation. 

So,  on  the  other  hand,  when  the  place  of  final  punishment  is 
described  as  “a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,”  and  other  and  similar 
dreadful  imagery,  literal  fire  is  not  meant,  but  only  a  place  of 
superlative  misery  and  wretchedness;  of  which  however  this 
human  language  and  imagery  could  give  no  adequate  represen¬ 
tation. 

The  two  distinct  elements  which  it  would  seem  must  enter 
the  most  largely  into  the  experience  of  souls  in  perdition,  will  be 
remorse  and  despair.  All  earthly  imagery  of  suffering  is  as 
nothing  compared  with  the  terrors  and  torments  of  these  two 
elements  when  working  with  their  full  powrnr  in  a  lost  soul. 


CONCLUSION. 


In  conclusion  it  appears  that  the  necessity  for  Endless  Pun¬ 
ishment  rests  upon  several  independent  grounds. 

1.  On  the  necessities  of  the  Divine  Nature  itself. 

Should  the  Almighty  threaten  710  penalty,  he  would  show,  as 
we  have  seen,  that  he  cared  not  whether  his  subjects  were  sinful 
or  holy;  or  whether  they  loved  or  hated  him;  or  whether  they 
loved  or  hated  each  other;  thus,  in  effect,  contradicting  his  own 
law,  “  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God.” 

To  threaten  finite  and  temporary  penalty,  would  show  only  a 
limited  amount  of  self-respect,  that  he  had  only  a  limited  and 
temporary  regard  for  the  happiness  of  the  endless  universe,  and 
only  a  limited  regard  for  holiness  itself,  and  was  not  the  utter 
antagonist  of  sin;  thus  proclaiming  an  infinite  falsehood  in  each 


147 

and  all  of  these  particulars;  and,  therefore,  unlimited  penalty  is 
indispensable. 

2.  This  necessity  appears  in  the  necessities  of  a  perfect  Moral 
Government. 

(1.)  A  perfect  moral  government  adequately  rewards  obedi¬ 
ence  as  that  which  honors  God,  ennobles  the  creature,  and  pours 
one  stream  of  unmingled  blessing  throughout  the  universe  for¬ 
evermore;  and,  therefore,  the  sanction  of  Reward  must  be  just 
that  which  he  has  promised — his  own  eternal  companionship  and 
affection — a  reward  which  nothing  else  can  transcend  in  value, 
and  whose  glory  and  blessedness  even  the  Almighty  himself  cannot 
increase.  But 

(2.)  Such  a  government  must  also  exactly  measure  the  enor¬ 
mity  and  ill-desert  of  sin  by  the  .Penalty  which  it  threatens  against 
it,  as  that  which  dishonors  God,  degrades  and  debases  the  sinner, 
and  left  to  itself,  would  spread  unmingled  and  eternal  wretched¬ 
ness  throughout  the  whole  moral  creation;  and  no  threatening  of 
mere  private  and  temporary  penalty  can  correspond  with  its  vile¬ 
ness;  and,  therefore,  also,  unlimited  penalty  becomes  indispensa¬ 
ble. 

(3.)  The  necessity  for  Endless  Penalty  is  found  also  in  the 
necessities  of  the  Endless  Universe  which  sin  has  invaded. 

In  such  a  universe  rebellion  must  be  arrested,  or  the  universe 
itself  suffer  the  far  greater  calamity  of  its  unrestrained  preva¬ 
lence. 

For  in  the  view  we  are  taking,  all  newly  created  beings,  if 
they  dare,  will  rebel  against  God.  They  love  their  own  way  in¬ 
stead  of  God’s  way,  and  will  take  it,  and  trample  on  the  Divine 
Authority,  if  they  dare,  even  as  did  the  angels.  And,  therefore, 
the  appeal  to  fear  is  indispensable  to  keep  them  from  apostasy. 
But  newly  created  beings  will  be  forever  coming  into  existence, 
and,  therefore,  the  appeal  to  fear,  in  the  punishment  of  the  un¬ 
godly  must  be  without  end. 

(4.)  This  necessity  is  found  also  in  the  harmony  of  the 
Divine  Administration ;  where  every  part  must  correspond  with 
every  other  part,  and  where  every  thing,  unless  it  be  penalty,  is 
infinite,  unbounded  and  eternal;  and,  therefore,  must  Penalty 
correspond  and  be  itself  eternal. 

(5.)  This  necessity  appears  also  from  the  infinite  provisions 
of  the  Atonement,  which  would  be  unnecessary  for  salvation  if 
the  sinner  could  by  any  amount  of  suffering,  or  in  any  way  what¬ 
ever  balance  his  account  with  the  violated  law  of  God. 

(6.)  Another  ground  for  this  necessity  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  all  has  been  done  for  the  salvation  of  the  sinner  in  this 
world  that  can  be  done  any  w7here  else,  so  that  probation  else- 
wrhere  would  be  useless.  Nothing  more  can  be  done  for  him. 
And  finally 


148 


(7.)  That  nothing  else  can  be  done  with  him  but  confine  him 
in  the  great  prison-house  of  the  universe  forever  more. 

Endless  punishment,  therefore,  becomes  the  inevitable  lot  of 
all  who  dare  go  into  eternity  unforgiven.  Not  because  God  de¬ 
sires  their  perdition,  for  he  is  “not  willing  that  any  should  per¬ 
ish.”  Not  because  he  does  not  rather  infinitely  desire  their  salva¬ 
tion,  for  he  has  made  an  infinite  sacrifice  to  render  it  possible, 
and  now,  as  he  says,  “will  have  all  men  to  be  saved.”  Not  be¬ 
cause  he  has  left  any  thing  unattempted  in  the  work  of  human  re¬ 
covery,  or  could  do,  properly  and  consistently,  in  this  direction, 
any  thing  more  than  he  has  done,  for  his  declaration  is  clear  and 
explicit :  “  What  could  have  been  done  more  to  m37  vineyard  that 
I  have  not  done  in  it?” 

The  only  reason  why  any  one  is  lost  is,  he  will  not  be  saved. 
He  will  not  give  up  his  sin.  He  loves  it  and  clings  to  it.  He 
puts  the  follies  and  vanities  of  the  world  in  the  place  of  the  im¬ 
mortal  crown.  He  resolutely  pushes  away  the  realities  of  death, 
judgment,  and  eternity  from  his  view,  even  though  he  knows  he 
will  soon  meet  them.  Especially  he  loves  his  own  way,  and  is 
determined  to  have  it,  even  though  he  dares  by  it  the  wrath  of 
God. 


CHAPTER  III. 


The  Governmental  Theory  of  the  Atonement. 

The  Atonement,  in  the  view  we  are  taking,  is  the  great  cen¬ 
tral  fact  of  the  universe — “  All  things  were  created  for  Him  ;  ” 
(Col.  1:16),  so  that  all  the  arrangements  of  the  universe,  past, 
present,  and  future,  have  prime  reference  to  the  w  ork  of  Redemp¬ 
tion.  In  this  view,  as  has  been  already  stated,  all  the  past  deal¬ 
ings  of  God  with  the  universe  have  been  only  in  the  way  of  prep¬ 
aration  for  its  introduction,  and  all  the  future  ages  will  only  be 
for  its  progressive  and  eternal  unfolding. 

The  experience  with  the  fallen  angels,  created,  as  they  are 
assumed  to  have  been,  with  the  best  possible  nature  because  com¬ 
ing  directly  from  the  hand  of  God,  and  placed,  as  they  must  have 
been,  in  the  best  possible  surroundings  for  the  development  of  a 
holy  character,  demonstrated  that  under  a  system  of  mere  law,  it 
was  not  possible  to  confirm  moral  beings  in  obedience  to  God  ; 
and,  therefore,  that  any  other  race  of  moral  beings,  created  at  that 
stage  of  the  universe,  would  also  sin  in  any  possible  circum¬ 
stances  in  which  they  could  be  created  and  placed. 

Consequently,  the  only  question  was — How  can  the  next  race 
of  beings  be  saved  after  they  have  sinned  ?  How  can  their  cir¬ 
cumstances  be  so  modified  that  as  sinners  they  can  be  success¬ 
fully  reached  by  a  scheme  of  recovering  grace  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  God  has  given  in  the  entire  con¬ 
ditions  of  men  in  this  world.  All  the  peculiar  circumstances  and 
surroundings  of  the  human  race  are  believed  to  have  been  ar¬ 
ranged  from  the  first  with  prime  reference  to  the  fact  that  it  would 
be  a  sinful  race,  and  were  especially  intended  to  so  reach  and  af¬ 
fect  it  as  to  render  an  atoning  sacrifice  efficacious,  and  salvation 
possible  for  the  entire  race.  How  could  this  be  done?  How  could 
a  sinner  be  delivered  from  the  penalty  of  his  transgression  under 
the  perfect  government  of  God  ?  How  could  his  sin  be  over¬ 
looked  and  forgiven  ?  How  could  he  be  treated  in  any  other  way 
than  in  accordance  with  the  demands  of  exact  justice  ? 

These  stupendous  questions,  none  but  the  Infinite  God  him¬ 
self  could  answer;  and  he  has  answered  them  by  the  introduction 
into  this  world  of  the  great  plan  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ 
which  we  are  now  to  consider  in  this  three-fold  aspect — its  rela¬ 
tions  to  God,  to  Man,  and  to  the  Future  Universe  of  Being. 

The  philosophical  aspects  of  the  atonement — How  innocence 
can  atone  for  guilt ;  how  obedience  can  make  up  for  disobedience  ; 
how  the  undeserved  sufferings  of  an  innocent  being  can  balance 


150 


the  deserved  sufferings  of  the  sinful,  and  other  similar  matters, 
have  been  fully  discussed  by  other  and  abler  writers  ;  and  more¬ 
over  have  no  additional  light  imparted  to  them  by  the  peculiar 
views  of  the  author  ;  and  all  consideration  of  them,  therefore,  will 
be  omitted,  and  only  the  simplest  and  most  obvious  points  be  pre¬ 
sented,  and  those  in  the  briefest  manner. 

Sec.  1.  The  Atonement  in  its  relations  to  God. 

The  design  of  the  Atonement  it  its  relations  to  God  is  to 
‘‘magnify  the  law  and  make  it  honorable;”  thus  enabling  the  Al¬ 
mighty  to  “  be  just,  and  yet  justify”  the  believing  sinner  ;  that  is, 
to  pardon  his  sin  without  impairing  the  perfection  of  his  own  ad¬ 
ministration. 

For  example — should  God  treat  one  of  his  moral  creatures 
worse  than  he  deserves,  the  songs  of  Heaven  would  stop,  and  the 
Heavens  themselves  be  hung  in  sackcloth.  The  intelligence  would 
go  abroad  that  God  was,  after  all,  an  imperfect  being.  He  had 
sinned  against  the  great  law7  of  Benevolence,  and  could  no  longer 
be  trusted. 

But  suppose  him  to  treat  him  better  than  he  deserves,  with 
no  compensation  like  the  Atonement.  The  result  would  be  equal¬ 
ly  disastrous  ;  for  it  would  be  a  sin  against  Justice.  In  either 
case,  his  administration — the  great  transcript  of  himself  and  his 
character  would  be  seen  to  be  imperfect,  and  therefore  himself  an 
imperfect  being,  and,  as  such,  unworthy  of  the  confidence  of  his 
intelligent  creation. 

Now  the  atonement  stands  so  related  to  God’s  moral  govern¬ 
ment  as  to  sustain  it  in  its  integrity,  and  the  Almighty  himself  in 
the  perfection  of  his  character,  and  still  allow  him,  with  safety,  to 
pour  out  his  infinite  love  upon  the  sinful  and  the  lost.  He  can 
now  “  justify  him  that  believeih  in  Jesus,”  sanctify  him  through 
the  influences  of  his  Divine  Spirit,  and  take  him  into  his  favor  for¬ 
evermore.  If  the  Atonement  be  regarded  as  having  this  for  its 
main  design — sustaining  the  Law  and  Government  of  God,  while 
mercy  is  thus  shown  to  the  sinful;  and  this  design  be  represented 
as  paramount  to  all  others,  this  is  called  the  Governmental  The¬ 
ory  of  the  Atonement. 

Sec.  2.  The  Atonement  in  its  relations  to  Man. 

The  design  of  the  Atonement  in  its  relations  to  Man  is, 

•  First — To  provide  for  man,  as  a  sinful  being,  the  possibility 
of  forgiveness.  He  can  make  no  compensation  for  his  own  sin, 
nor  by  any  “works  of  righteousness  which  he  may  do,”  reinstate 
himself  in  the  forfeited  favor  and  friendship  of  the  Almighty  ; 
seeing  that  perfect  obedience  is  his  duty  from  the  first,  and,  there¬ 
fore,  he  can  never  render  any  more  than  that,  and,  therefore,  can 


151 


never  make  up  for  kis  past  sin.  If  tiie  account  of  sin  is,  therefore, 
ever  to  be  settled,  some  one  else  must  settle  it  for  him.  Having 
nothing  with  which  to  pay  his  debt,  some  one  else  must  pay  it,  if 
it  is  ever  cancelled.  And  now  all  disabilities  whatever  incurred 
by  the  sinner,  Christ  proposed  to  remove  on  the  one  condition  of 
faith  exercised  in  him — to  forgive  him  freely,  to  remember  his  sins 
no  more  against  him,  and  even  reinstate  him  in  the  divine  favor 
as  completely  as  if  he  had  never  sinned.  “  Being  justified  freely 
by  his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus.” 
(Rom.  3:24.) 

Second — To  melt  his  heart  in  contrition  for  his  sin  as  having 
been  committed  against  a  God  of  infinite  kindness,  compassion 
and  love,  manifested  in  the  provisions  of  grace  made  for  his  salva¬ 
tion  ;  and  thus  lead  him  to  be  willing  to  accept  of  these  provisions 
through  Christ  Jesus,  and  become  a  forgiven  sinner. 

Third — To  relieve  him  from  the  heavy  burden  of  conscious 
guilt.  As  a  redeemed  and  forgiven  sinner  God  says  to  him,  “Your 
sins  and  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more.”  And  thus  the  bur¬ 
den  is  lifted  from  his  soul,  and  he  has  “  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.”* 

*  The  mass  of  thoughtful  men  in  Christian  lands  who  are  yet  not  Chris¬ 
tians,  are  thinking  thus — must  I  believe  the  Gospel  ?  Can  I  not  in  some 
way  dispense  with  it  ?  Can  I  not  believe  Christ  to  have  been,  after  all, 
a  mere  man  ;  and  can  there  not  be  some  scheme  which  shall  leave  out 
the  attribute  of  his  divinity  and  yet  meet  the  entire  problem  of  his  life, 
sufferings  and  death,  and  which  shall  also  lift  the  burden  of  guilt  from 
human  souls  ?  Cannot  the  problem  of  human  salvation  from  the  deserved 
consequences  of  sin  be  solved  without  the  assumption  of  a  Savior  who  is 
‘  ‘  God  manifest  in  the  flesh  f  ” 

But  the  question  to  be  asked  such  a  one  in  return  is — Why  should  you 
wish  to  ?  The  gospel  of  the  New  Testament  proclaimed  an  almighty  Savior 
from  sin.  Why  should  you  wish  an  inferior  one  ?  Why  wish  to  rob  him 
of  that  almightiness  ?  The  question  should  rather  be — May  I  believe  in 
the  gospel  of  the  Infinite  Son  of  God  ?  May  I  believe  that  God  has  stooped 
in  tenderness  and  pity  to  the  lost,  folded  them  in  the  arms  of  his  love,  and 
provided  for  them  an  infinite  redemption  through  the  sacrifice  of  his 
divine  and  beloved  Son  ? 

And,  indeed,  with  every  one  who  had  once  really  seen  his  own  sinful¬ 
ness,  the  question  never  is  7nust  I  believe  this  Gospel  plan  of  Salvation, 
but  may  I?  May  I  believe  that  a  way  has  been  opened  by  which,  as  a 
sinner  against  God,  I  may  be  forgiven  ? 

The  author  of  “Robert  Elsmere”  has  evidently  bestowed  little  or 
no  reflection  on  her  own  personal  relations  to  God  as  a  sinner.  The  tre¬ 
mendous  question  has  never  been  seriously  pondered  by  her — What  shall 
I  do  with  my  past  sin  ?  It  has  never  come  home  to  her — I  have  not  loved 
God  with  all  my  heart,  as  I  was  commanded  to,  and  what  shall  I  do 
about  it  ?  I  can  neither  undo  it,  nor  cancel  it,  and  what  shall  be  done 
with  it?  If,  rejecting  the  Bible  plan  of  mercy  and  forgiveness,  she 
assumes  that  the  rightful  penalty  of  sin  must  be  met,  and  that  there  is  no 
escaping  it,  she  is  doubtless  also  very  careful  to  assume  the  penalty  to  be 
limited  and  temporary,  when  it  may  not  he.  Should  she  ever  confront 
intelligently  the  fact  of  her  own  personal  sinfulness,  in  the  sight  of  God, 


152 


Fourth, — To  sanctify  him.  As  he  cannot  wash  the  stains 
of  guilt  from  his  own  soul,  nor  undo  the  work  of  sin  in  his 
own  heart,  so  some  one  else  must  do  it  for  him.  And  this  the 
Saviour  does — “Unto  him  that  loved  us  and  washed  us  from  our 
sins  in  his  own  blood.”  (Rev.  1  :  5.) 

Fifth. — To  set  before  him  a  perfect  example  of  holy  living 
and  acting.  Christ  was  made  in  all  things  like  us,  (Heb.  2  :  17,) 
and  inherited  all  the  weaknesses  and  infirmities  that  we  inherit, 
and  encountered  all  the  obstacles  to  right  living  and  acting  that 
we  encounter.  And  yet  by  self-denial,  by  resistance  to  tempta¬ 
tion,  and  by  earnest  devotion  to  God  and  his  service,  he  kept  him¬ 
self  true  to  God  and  duty,  and  thus  showed  us  the  grand  capabil¬ 
ities  of  our  human  nature — what  we  may  do,  what  we  should  do, 
and  what  we  ought  to  expect  to  accomplish  in  the  wTay  of  right 
living  and  acting  ;  as  the  apostle  says,  “  Leaving  us  an  example 
that  we  should  follow  his  steps  icho  did  no  sin.'1'1  (1  Pet.  2  :  21.) 

Sixth. — Another  object  in  the  Savior’s  xMission  to  the  world, 
was  to  introduce  into  it  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  encour¬ 
age,  to  stimulate,  and  to  assist  us  in  every  honest  effort  to  glorify 
God. 

Seventh. — To  be  with  us  in  the  dying  hour,  and  then  to 
“  present  us  faultless  before  the  presence  of  his  glory  with  ex¬ 
ceeding  joy.”  (Jude  24.) 

Sec.  3.  The  Atonement  in  its  relations  to  the  Future 
Universe  of  being. 

In  the  plan  of  the  Universe  developed  in  these  pages,  the  grand 
characteristic  of  the  Atonement  is  that  it  opens  the  only  door  of 
salvation,  not  only  to  this  world,  but  to  the  future  universe  of 
moral  beings,  so  that  without  it  not  a  moral  being  could  ever  be 
confirmed  in  obedience  to  God ;  thus  making  it  lie  at  the  found¬ 
ation  of  the  entire  happiness  of  the  universe  through  eternal 
ages.  To  show  this  more  clearly  is  our  present  design. 

In  the  previous  chapters  the  effort  has  been  to  show  that  the 
motive  of  fear  is  inseparable  from  the  successful  workings  of 
all  moral  governments ;  and  especially,  that  it  is  an  indis¬ 
pensable  element  in  the  moral  government  of  God,  so  that 
without  it,  no  moral  beings  can  be  deterred  from  sinning,  and  be¬ 
come  confirmed  in  eternal  allegiance  to  the  Divine  Government. 

the  great  question  will  at  once  be— May  I  believe  in  Jesus  as  the  son  of 
God  ;  may  I  believe  that  ‘  ‘  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only 
begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  life.”  (John  3  : 16.)  And  when  anyone  approaches  the 
question  in  that  form,  the  whole  Bible  is  seen  at  once  to  glow  and  blaze 
with  the  proofs  of  the  divine  mission  of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  world  as  an 
Almighty  Savior,  the  Son  of  God,  the  God-man,  “the  Lamb  slain  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world.”  (Rev.  1  3:  8.) 


J 


153 


Bat  an  apppeal  to  fear  alone  will  never  secure  anything  more 
than  temporary  obedience  under  any  government.  Not  that  it 
can  ever  be  dispensed  with,  but  something  is  needed  beyond  this. 
The  Lawgiver  who  undertakes  to  enforce  obedience  only  by  fear, 
with  little  or  no  manifestation  of  affeetion  and  good-will  toward 
his  subjects,  becomes  in  their  apprehension  a  tyrant ;  and  the 
hatred  engendered  by  this  conviction,  will  sooner  or  later  terminate 
in  open  rebellion.  And,  therefore,  in  order  that  hearty  obedience 
may  be  secured  on  the  part  of  the  governed,  there  must  be  an  ap¬ 
peal  to  affection  as  well  as  fear.  The  administrator  of  govern¬ 
ment  must  convince  those  under  his  control  that  he  has  their  best 
welfare  at  heart,  and  must  give  evidence  of  his  affectionate  inter¬ 
est  in  them,  before  he  can  receive  affection  in  return.  Love  mani¬ 
fested  begets  love ;  and,  furthermore,  where  the  firmness  and 
truthfulness  of  the  Lawgiver  are  fully  believed  in,  no  manifesta¬ 
tion  of  kindness,  tenderness  and  love,  can  be  too  great.  Even  the 
greater  such  a  manifestation  is,  in  these  circumstances,  the  more 
fully  will  it  tend  to  develop  affection  on  the  part  of  the  governed. 
Illustrations  of  this  truth  might  be  multiplied  to  almost  any  ex¬ 
tent  ;  for  the  entire  workings  of  human  society  accord  with  it. 

In  all  successful  government,  therefore,  there  must  be  an  ap¬ 
peal  to  affection  as  well  as  fear.  In  fact,  unless  there  was  good 
and  sufficient  proof  of  the  Benevolence  of  the  Lawgiver,  and  that 
he  was  actuated  by  a  desire  for  the  best  good  of  all,  there  could 
be  no  moral  obligation  to  respect  his  government. 

And  we  find,  that,  in  the  moral  government  of  God,  there  is 
ever  an  appeal  to  this  motive  also.  Not  only  is  God  revealing 
himself  in  a  terrible  aspect,  but  he  is  also  manifesting  traits  of  ten¬ 
derness  and  love,  of  warm  and  hearty  friendship  for  the  creatures 
he  has  made  ;  and  therefore,  Paul,  when  standing  on  the  top  of 
Mars  Hill,  and  preaching  to  those  who  had  derived  their  knowl¬ 
edge  of  God  only  from  the  light  of  nature,  could  yet  give  them 
abundant  reason  why  they  should  exercise  toward  him  feelings  of 
gratitude  and  affection,  “  in  that  he  did  good,  and  gave  them  rain 
from  heaven  and  fruitful  seasons,  filling  their  hearts  with  food 
and  gladness and  the  head  and  front  of  their  offending,  as  he 
says  in  another  place,  was,  that,  “  when  they  knew  God,”  knew 
how  well  worthy  he  was  of  their  esteem,  “they  glorified  him  not 
as  God  neither  were  thankful  (Rom.  1 :  21.) 

And  this  twofold  appeal  to  fear  and  affection  comes  out  in 
the  Bible  with  remarkable  clearness. 

This  has  been  fully  shown  in  a  previous  connection.  Let  it 
be  briefly  adverted  to  again. 

Rom.  11 :  22.  “Behold  therefore,  the  good7iess  and  severity  of 
God  ;  on  them  which  fell  severity,  but  toward  thee  goodness.” 
Again : 

Rom.  9  :  22.  “  What  if  God,  willing  to  show  his  wrath  and 


161 


to  moke  his  power  known"  &c.,in  which  the  statement  plainly  is, 
that  God,  in  his  treatment  of  the  “  vessels  of  wrath,”  is  desiring 
and  seeking  to  exhibit  his  “  power,”  and  to  manifest  his  “wrath,” 
that  is,  his  displeasure  against  sin ;  thus  bringing  out  to  view  the 
sterner  elements  of  his  character  as  the  great  Moral  Governor, 
and  who  will  certainly  punish  transgression.  Here  is  the  appeal 
to  fear ,  and  now  follows  the  appeal  to  affection. 

Rom.  9  :  23.  “  And  that  he  might  make  known  the  riches  of 

his  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy,”  &c.  ;  where  the  statement  is, 
also,  equally  plain,  that  God  is  making  use  of  his  treatment  of 
redeemed  and  sanctified  men,  for  the  manifestation  of  himself  in 
the  opposite  way,  and  bringing  to  view  his  character  as  a  being  of 
paternal  tenderness  and  compassion  even  for  the  sinful.  Indeed 
the  giving  of  his  “  only  begotten  and  well  beloved  Son,”  for  the 
salvation  of  a  sinful  world,  is  one  of  the  strongest  appeals  to  af¬ 
fection  which  ever  has  been  made,  or  ever  can  be, — it  is  even  the 
strongest  conceivable. 

Now  the  question  is — AVhat  end  is  to  be  secured  by  so  won¬ 
derful  a  manifestation  ?  Must  it  not  have  been  designed  for  some 
very  important  purpose  ?  Certainly,  if  it  correspond  with  the 
expenditure;  for  no  greater  expenditure  could  even  Omnipotence 
incur  than  to  give  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God  for  human  re¬ 
demption  and  salvation.  No  greater  exhibition  of  tenderness  and 
love  could  have  been  made  than  this.  Now  can  any  end  be  con¬ 
ceived  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  warrant  such  an  expenditure — 
such  a  sacrifice,  except  that  of  securing  obedience  to  Law  on  the 
part  of  his  entire  moral  creation  ?  If  so,  what  is  it  ?  The  ques¬ 
tion  is  one  difficult,  if  not  impossible  to  be  answered ;  and,  there¬ 
fore,  this  great  object — in  the  very  nature  of  things,  that  which 
he  must  love  above  all  others,  in  his  relations  to  his  creatures — is, 
in  all  probability,  the  one  which  God  is  thus  aiming  to  secure. 

The  reasons  for  thus  believing  are  as  follows: 

First.  There  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  to  forbid  it. 

Secondly.  There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the  case  to  for¬ 
bid  it.  There  is  no  inconsistency  in  connecting  with  so  great  an 
event  as  the  death  of  God’s  “  only  and  well  beloved  Son,”  results 
of  the  greatest  conceivable  magnitude. 

Thirdly.  The  general  language  of  the  Bible  harmonizes  per¬ 
fectly  wuth  such  a  view. 

The  atonement  is  there  represented  as  a  most  stupendous 
work  in  itself,  and  its  results  as  permanent  and  surpassingly  glo¬ 
rious. 

It  is  represented  in  itself  as  the  greatest  conceivable  work. 
Christ  is  declared  to  be  the  “  Lord  of  glory  ” — u  the  Creator  and 
upholder  of  all  things,”  “  for  whose  pleasure  they  are  and  were 
created.” 

And  yet  there  was  an  object  to  be  secured  of  such  vast  mo- 


155 


ment,  that  “  lie  who  was  in  the  form  of  God,  thought  it  not  a 
thing  to  be  coveted  to  be  equal  with  God,  but  made  himself  of 
no  reputation,  and  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  be¬ 
came  obedient  unto  death.” 

“  Wherefore ,”  continues  the  Apostle,  (thus  directly  connect¬ 
ing  his  work  on  earth  with  his  subsequent  exaltation  in  Heaven,) 
“  God  also  hath  highly  exalted  him,  and  given  him  a  name  which 
is  above  every  name  ;  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  (Savior)  every 
knee  should  bow  in  Heaven  and  Earth  and  under  the  Earth,  and 
that  every  tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord  to  the 
glory  of  God  the  Father” — (Phil.  2:6-11) — as  though  his  one 
work  as  Saviour  of  men  would  become  the  foundation  of  his  exal¬ 
tation  in  Heaven,  and  of  those  peculiar  honors  which  would  be 
paid  him  through  the  universe,  and  which  would  redound  equally 
to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father.  What  higher  impression  could 
be  conveyed  of  the  intrinsic  greatness  and  glory  of  the  work  of 
Redemption. 

Fourthly.  The  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  God  in  giving  his 
Son  for  human  salvation,  is  represented  as  exceedingly  great. 
“  For  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish  but  have  ever¬ 
lasting  life.”  (Jno.  3:16.)  And  “He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son 
but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with  him  also 
freely  give  us  all  things .”  (Rom.  8:32.) 

“  And  again  when  he  bringeth  in  the  first  begotten  into  the 
world  he  saith:  ‘And  let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him,’ 
(Heb.  1 :6) — as  if  upon  the  occurrence  of  such  an  event  there  was 
a  call  for  the  particular  notice  of  all  heaven.  And  says  the  Apos¬ 
tle  furthermore,  “  God — hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us 
by  his  Son,  who — when  he  had  by  himself  purged  our  sins ,  sat 
down  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high;  ”  (Heb.  1 :3) ;  or 
as  the  Apostle  expresses  it  in  another  place,  “after  he  had  offered 
one  sacrifice  for  sins ,  forever  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God,” 
(Heb.  10:12.)  as  if  the  great  work  of  eternity  culminated  in  this. 

And  there  John  heard  the  whole  universe  of  beings  chanting 
his  praise  in  his  distinctive  character  still  as  the  “  Lamb  slain.” 
“  And  every  creature  which  is  in  heaven  and  on  the  earth  and 
under  the  earth  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea  and  all  that  are  in  them, 
heard  I  saying,  ‘Blessing,  and  honor,  and  glory,  and  power,  be 
unto  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne  and  unto  the  Lamb  forever 
and  ever.’”  (Rev.  5:13.) 

Fifthly.  The  wonderful  and  inconceivable  exaltation  of  the 
Redeemed,  favors  also  the  supposition  of  the  wide  spread  influ¬ 
ence  of  the  work  of  Redemption;  for  we  should  infer  that  the 
consideration  with  which  they  were  treated,  and  the  elevation  of 
their  position,  would  correspond  in  a  great  measure  with  the 
lustre  which  their  redemption  had  shed  upon  the  character  and 


156 


administration  of  the  Almighty,  and  with  the  blessings  secured 
by  it  to  the  universe  of  moral  beings.  In  describing  the  great¬ 
ness  of  that  exaltation  the  Scriptures  exhaust  the  capacities  of 
language.  This  will  abundantly  appear  when  we  come  to  notice 
the  Redeemed  Church. 

Sixthly.  So  immeasurably  vast  are  the  final  results  of  Re¬ 
demption,  that  the  Redeemer  “  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul 
and  be  satisfied.” 

Seventhly.  Additional  plausibility  may  perhaps  be  imparted 
to  the  supposition  we  are  considering,  from  the  following  pas¬ 
sage  of  Scripture,  Eph.  2:7 — “  That  in  the  ages  to  come  he  might 
show  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace,  in  his  kindness  toward  us 
through  Christ  Jesus.” 

O  #  # 

This  declaration  is  worthy  of  special  notice. 

1.  It  is  the  “exceeding  riches  of  his  grace  and  kindness,” 
which  are  made  known,  that  is,  there  is  an  exhibition  made  of 
God’s  character  of  tenderness  and  compassion,  mercy  and  love — 
those  traits  of  all  others  the  most  subduing  and  winning. 

2.  This  exhibition  is  made  by  means  of  his  “  kindness 
towards  us  through  Christ  Jesus,  that  is,  his  kindness  in  provid¬ 
ing  for  the  guilty  sinners  of  this  world,  the  atonement  by  Jesus 
Christ. 

3.  This  exhibition  is  to  be  made  “  in  the  ages  to  come,” 
iv  to7 ?  aiaxji  rtn ?  ^7teyxo/ilvot?.  Most  commentators  are  agreed  in 
making  this  expression  refer  to  all  future  time  both  in  this  world 
and  the  next,  that  is,  that  this  exhibition  is  to  be  made  through 
eternity. 

4.  It  is  to  be  made  to  some  kind  or  order  of  beings,  and  for 
some  great  and  glorious  object — an  object  of  sufficient  magnitude 
and  importance  to  make  the  redeemed  church  a  “  crown  of  glory 
in  the  hand  of  the  Lord  and  a  royal  diadem  in  the  hand  of  God,” 
— “  the  f  ullness  of  him  that  filletk  all  in  all.” 

A  very  striking  passage  occurs  also  in  Col.  1 :  19,  20,  which 
may  bear  on  the  point  we  are  urging,  but  which  is  merely  quoted, 
leaving  the  reader  to  apply  it  to  the  present  case  or  not,  as  he 
shall  deem  most  proper.  “  For  it  was  the  good  pleasure  of  the 
Father — through  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself — 
whether  things  upon  the  earth,  or  things  in  the  heavens .”  (Rev. 
Ver.) 

The  assumption,  therefore,  is  not  at  all  unreaonsble  that 
right  here  we  are  to  find  the  great  and  grand  design  of  the  Atone¬ 
ment — to  so  present  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  to  the  future 
races  of  the  universe,  as  they  shall  be  endlessly  created,  that  they 
shall  be  led,  under  the  trial  of  probation,  to  decide  for  God  and 
holiness,  and  so,  in  connection  with  other  motives  which  have  been 
mentioned,  become  confirmed  in  eternal  loyalty  to  him. 

At  all  events  we  know  of  no  influence  so  well  calculated  to 


157 

draw  moral  beings  in  love  and  obedience  to  God  as  the  exhibition 
to  them  of  his  compassion  for  the  sinful.  Certainly  nothing  tends 
so  thoroughly  here  in  this  world  to  reclaim  a  sinner.  No  motives 
drawn  from  Heaven,  Earth  or  Hell,  nor  all  combined,  have  such 
power  to  stir  the  heart  of  an  impenitent  man,  and  to  lead  him  to 
give  up  his  sins,  as  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus. 

It  is  entirely  a  logical  inference,  therefore,  that  nothing  could 
have  such  power  to  influence  the  soul  of  a  newly -created  being  in 
the  same  direction.  He  has  come,  we  will  suppose,  to  the  point 
of  intelligent  responsibility.  He  has  come,  to  the  knowledge  of 
God  and  duty,  and  is  now  on  probation,  as  was  Adam  in  the 
garden.  He  is  deciding,  under  the  impulse  of  conscious  freedom 
and  his  love  of  having  his  own  way,  and  his  consequent  dislike  of 
restraint,  whether  he  will  go  off,  like  the  fallen  angels,  in  rebellion 
against  God,  or  surrender  himself  to  the  will  and  control  of  the 
Almighty.  Certainly  nothing  can  meet  him  so  powerfully  at  this 
point,  and  so  lead  him  to  decide  for  God,  as  the  presentation  of 
the  Saviour — the  son  of  God,  enduring  the  agony  of  the  garden 
and  the  cross  rather  than  oppose  the  will  and  pleasure  of  his 
Heavenly  Father,  and  refuse  submission. 

Now  in  the  light  of  the  foregoing  considerations,  though  we 
do  not  certainly  know  what  are  the  precise  relations  of  the  Atone¬ 
ment  to  the  entire  system  of  things,  yet  we  surely  can  not  err  in 
giving  those  relations  too  great  importance.  The  only  fear  is 
that  our  highest  conceptions  of  them  will  fall  entirely  below  their 
real  grandeur.* 

*  A  brief  quotation  from  Dr.  Chalmers  is  in  place  here,  showing 
how  even  great  men  sometimes  misapprehend  plain  scripture  teachings. 
He  is  meeting  the  infidel  objection  that  the  Bible  plan  of  Redemption  in¬ 
volves  too  great  an  expenditure  for  this  single  world;  and  he  undertakes 
to  meet  it  by  the  two-fold  representation  that  the  time  occupied  by  it  is 
as  nothing  compared  with  the  endless  ages;  and  also  that  the  transaction 
itself  is  only  an  insignificant  one  as  compared  with  a  multitude  of  other 
of  the  unfoldings  of  God’s  eternal  administration. 

His  statement  is  this — “  The  time  is  coming  when  the  whole  of  this 
wondrous  history  will  be  looked  back  upon  by  the  eye  of  remembrance, 
and  be  regarded  as  one  incident  in  the  extended  annals  of  creation;  and 
with  all  the  illustration,  and  all  the  glory  which  it  has  thrown  on  the 
character  of  the  Deity,  will  it  be  seen  as  a  single  step  in  the  evolution  of 
his  designs;  and  as  long  as  the  time  may  appear  from  the  first  act  of  our 
redemption  to  its  final  accomplishment,  and  close  and  exclusive  as  we 
may  think  the  attention  of  God  upon  it,  will  it  be  seen  that  it  lia  s  left  him 
room  enough  for  all  his  concerns;  and  that  on  the  high  scale  of  eternity, 
it  is  but  one  of  those  pa. sing  and  ephemeral  transactions  which  crowd  the 
history  of  a  never-ending  administration.” 

Now,  however  lofty  and  eloquent  the  above  language  may  be,  it  is 
still  most  eminently  untrue  to  fact;  for  there  is  not  a  word  from  Genesis 
to  Revelation,  indicating  the  plan  of  Redemption  to  be  an  “  ephemeral 
transaction,”  but  every  scripture  statement  points  to  it  as  the  great  cen¬ 
tral  fact  of  the  universe,  and  which  shall  unfold  itself  in  ever  increasing 
developments  of  greatness  and  grandeur  throughout  the  “  ages  to  come.” 
“  All  things  were  created  for  him.”  (Col.  1:16.) 


158 


Whatever  place,  therefore,  in  the  moral  universe,  we  give 
the  plan  of  Redemption,  should  be  one  adapted  to  elevate  that 
plan  in  our  apprehension,  to  the  highest  degree,  and  to  fill  us 
with  wonder  and  admiration. 

In  particular,  in  order  to  harmonize  with  the  Scripture  view 
of  the  atonement,  it  should  be  represented — 

First — As  the  great  and  only  sacrifice  for  sin — the  first  and 
final  exhibition  of  God’s  mercy  to  the  sinful,  so  that  after  this 
“ one  sacrifice”  the  Redeemer  “ forever  sat  down  on  the  right 
hand  of  God.”  (Heb.  10:12.) 

Secondly. — As  so  great  a  work  that  it  lays  the  foundation  of 
Christ’s  exaltation  throughout  the  universe — “  Wherefore  God 
also  hath  highly  exalted  him,”  &c.  (Phil.  2:6-11.) 

Thirdly — It  should  hold  such  a  place  as  to  correspond  with 
the  peculiar  and  wonderful  exaltation  of  the  saints  in  glory. 

Fourthly—  The  results  which  are  made  to  flow  from  it, 
should  be  vast  enough  to  “ satisfy^  the  Redeemer  for  all  his 
mighty  sufferings.  (Is.  53:11.) 

These  conditions,  it  is  believed,  are  fully  answered  by  the 
present  hypothesis. 

This  supposes  that  the  scheme  of  Redemption  has  been  in¬ 
troduced  at  the  dawning-time  of  the  Moral  Creation,  as  a  full  and 
final  exhibition  of  the  Divine  Mercy,  and  that  the  history  of  this, 
handed  down  through  the  coming  ages  of  eternity,  and  attested 
by  the  great  company  of  the  redeemed,  will  be  fully  sufficient  to 
make  known  to  the  universe  forever  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God, 
and  become  the  grand  crowning  motive  by  which  all  worlds,  as 
they  shall  be  successively  peopled,  will  be  held  in  obedience  and 
love  to  dlie  Almighty — and  thus  the  Redemption  of  this  single 
world  by  Jesus  Christ,  will  lie  at  the  foundation  of  the  entire 
happiness  of  the  universe  through  eternal  ages. 

In  this  view,  what  a  mighty  meaning  there  was  in  the  dying 
utterance  of  the  crucified  Saviour — “It  is  finished;  ”  an  utterance 
that  meant,  not  merely  that  provision  had  thus  been  made  for  the 
world’s  salvation,  but  that  also  a  foundation  had  been  laid  for  the 
holiness  and  happiness  of  a  moral  universe  reaching  and  expand¬ 
ing  throughout  the  endless  ages. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


The  Moral  Theory  of  the  Atonement. 

The  Governmental  Theory  of  the  Atonement,  as  lias  been 
stated,  is  that  thej primary  design  of  the  Atonement  is  to  sustain 
the  government  of  God  in  its  integrity'while  the  penitent  sinner 
was  released  from  the  penalty  of  his  sin  ;  and  that  the  moral 
power  of  it  in  leading  sinners  to  repentance  was  a  secondary 
matter.  It  does  not'  ignore  at  all  the  moral  power  of  the  Atone¬ 
ment  ;  only  assumes  that  the  relations  of  the  Atonement  to  the 
Divine  government  stand  first  in  order — that  the  Governmental 
relation  is  the  primary  one — that  the  first  thing  to  be  done,  if  a 
world  of  sinners  is  to  be  saved,  is  to  make  forgiveness/>c>s5^/6  under 
the  perfect  government  of  God ;  and  when  that  possibility  of 
pardon  is  secured — when  the  grand  edifice  of  moral  government 
shall  have  been  sustained  in  its  integrity  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ, 
magnifying  the  Law  and  making  it  honorable,”  then  the  moral 
power  of  that  sacrifice  can  safely  and  properly  come  in  to  touch 
the  sensibilities,  awaken  the  conscience,  and  soften  the  hard 
hearts  of  men  in  penitence  and  love,  and  may  even  be  used  for 
influencing  moral  beings  hereafter  and  forever. 

On  the  other  hand  the  Moral  Influence  Theory  is,  that  the 
primary  design  of  the  Atonement  is  to  so  exhibit  God’s  affection 
for  sinners  as  to  lead  them  to  repentance. 

It  does  not  ignore  at  all  its  Governmental  relations,  only 
makes  them  of  secondary  consideration  as  compared  with  its 
influence  in  saving  men. 

1.  This  single  feature  of  this  Moral  Theory — that  it  gives 
the  Governmental  relations  of  the  Atonement  the  secondary 
place  in  God’s  Moral  government,  is  enough  of  itself  to  condemn 
it. 

For  place  the  two  in  contrast — on  the  one  side  is  the  integ¬ 
rity  of  God’s  character  and  administration  as  the  primary  matter, 
and  on  the  other  the  salvation  of  the  sinner  as  the  primary  matter. 
In  the  Governmental  view,  therefore,  God  and  his  administration 
are  to  be  saved,  come  what  will.  In  the  Moral  Theory  view,  the 
sinner  is  to  be  3aved,  come  what  will ;  as  if  the  salvation  of  a  guilty 
and  hell-deserving  sinner  was  intrinsically  of  more  consequence 
than  God  and  his  government — the  creature  than  the  Creator  !  If 
this  be  not  enough  to  condemn  it,  reverse  the  matter — suppose 
God  or  the  sinner  is  to  be  sacrificed,  which  shall  it  be  ?  And  the 


160 


question  needs  only  to  be  asked,  and  the  matter  is  settled :  and 
the  Moral  Theory  is  shown  to  be  false  from  the  foundation.* 

2.  A  second  feature  of  this  Moral  Theory,  as  generally  ad¬ 
vocated,  is  this — That  the  main  design  of  the  Atonement  is  “  to 
succor  and  save  men” 

(1.)  One  objection  to  this  view  is  that  it  logically  involves 
Universalism. 

If  human  salvation  be  the  main  design  of  the  Atonement, 
then,  as  the  Atonement  is  the  great  central  fact  of  the  universe, 
and  every  thing  else  subordinate  and  subservient  to  it,  so  must 
every  thing  else  be  subordinate  and  subservient  to  its  main  de¬ 
sign.  And  if  the  main  design  of  it  be  human  salvation,  then 
every  thing  else  must  give  way  to  that,  and  mankind  be  saved  to 
a  certainty,  and  universalism  is  the  logical  result. 

(2.)  Another  objection  is  that,  to  make  the  salvation  of 
men  merely  the  main  object,  would  appear  utterly  inharmonious 
with  the  magnitude  of  the  expenditure.  The  atonement  is  an  in¬ 
finite  provision — a  work  in  which  omnipotence  travails  in  the 
greatness  of  its  strength,  and  whose  results  are  to  “  satisfy  ”  the 
Redeemer  for  all  his  mighty  sufferings.  (Isa.  53:11.)  And  no 
results  reached  here  in  this  world,  where  sin  and  not  holiness,  re¬ 
bellion  and  not  salvation,  have  been  almost  the  universal  rule  for 
six  thousand  years,  can  possibly  be  made  to  harmonize  with  so 
mighty  a  work — so  vast  an  expenditure — indeed,  nothing  finite 
— no  achievement  that  is  limited  in  its  results — can  harmonize  with 
it.  And  no  conceivable  view  but  that  which  makes  the  whole 
endless  universe  of  moral  beings,  endlessly  enlarging,  to  be  de¬ 
pendent  on  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  final  confirmation  in  holiness 
and  happiness,  will  fully  correspond  with  the  infinite  greatness 
and  grandeur  of  the  expenditure. 

The  only  position  that  fully  harmonizes  with  the  Bible,  is 
that  the  main  design  of  the  Atonement  is  not  to  save  men ,  but 
the  universe  of  moral  beings  so  far  as  this  can  be  safely  accom¬ 
plished — to  secure  the  salvation  of  moral  beings  anywhere  and 
everywhere  where  salvation  is  possible.  Wherever  in  the  wide 
universe,  Christ  can  accomplish  salvation  so  as  to  compensate  him 
for  his  infinite  sacrifice,  or  at  whatever  time — now,  hereafter,  or 
forever — he  will  do  it.  And  this  sweeping  statement  is  borne  out 
by  the  Scriptures.  “  Now”  says  the  Apostle,  in  Ephesians  3:10, 
“  now  ” — in  these  incipient  stages  of  the  moral  universe — God  is 
revealing  himself  in  the  atonement,  and  through  the  redeemed 
“ church,”  to  the  angels  of  heaven.  The  “principalities  and  pow- 

*  This  is  believed  to  be  the  fundamental  error  in  the  system,  of  Dr. 
Bushnel — subordinating  the  governmental  relations  of  the  Atonement  to 
the  moral  relations,  instead  of  reversing  the  matter,  and  giving  the  Gov¬ 
ernmental  relations  the  prime  place  in  the  general  system;  and  this  is 
believed  to  be  the  reason  why  he  was  never  satisfied  with  his  own  system. 


161 


ers  in  heavenly  places  ”  have  been  all  comprehended  in  its  pro¬ 
visions.  Why  and  wherefore,  if  it  be  not  to  draw  them  in  loving 
obedience  to  himself  ? 

Notice  again,  in  Ephesians  2:7,  that  “in  the  ages  to  come” 
— the  long  ages  of  eternity — the  same  manifestation  will  be  made, 
and  God  will  continue  to  “  show  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace, 
through  Christ  Jesus,”  it  does  not  say  to  ivhom,  but  why  should 
we  not  reverently  assume  to  all  moral  beings  who  shall  come 
after  them  through  the  endless  ages,  and  with  the  same  grand  ob¬ 
ject  in  view — the  endless  confirmation  of  them  also  in  holiness 
and  happiness?  Such,  at  least,  is  the  theory  of  the  atonement 
sketched  in  these  pages;  and  it  is  believed  to  be  the  only  one  per¬ 
fectly  harmonizing  with  all  the  facts  and  intimations  of  the  Bible. 
This  makes  salvation  its  prime  object  everywhere  and  forever:  in 
this  world,  to  save  all  who  can  be  led  to  repentance  for  their  sin; 
in  the  “  ages  to  come,”  to  save  all/rom  sinning. 

And  this  is  entirely  reasonable;  for  the  salvation  of  moral 
beings  elsewhere  is  just  as  important  and  valuable  as  their  salva¬ 
tion  here  in  this  world. 

Also,  it  is  just  as  important  and  desirable  to  keep  moral  be¬ 
ings  from  sinning  as  to  save  them  after  they  have  sinned.  And 
even  more  so  ;  for  sinless  beings  have  done  nothing  to  forfeit 
God’s  favor,  and  may  be  kept  forever  from  transgression ;  while 
the  sinful  have  wickedly  rebelled  against  him,  and  set  in  opera¬ 
tion  a  train  of  causes  and  effects,  whose  final  influence  can  only 
be  destructive  and  disastrous;  all  of  which  would  have  been  pre¬ 
vented  had  they  only  been  kept  from  sinning. 

3.  A  third  feature  of  this  “  Moral  Theory”  scheme  is,  that  its 
advocates  have  come  quite  generally,  in  their  efforts  to  save  men, 
to  ignore  the  sterner  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  and  rely  almost  en¬ 
tirely  on  the  presentation  of  the  Divine  Love  as  manifested  in  the 
Atonement.  For  example,  a  minister  has  been  known  for  years 
to  preach  the  truth  contained  in  the  first  part  of  the  Apostle’s 
declaration  (John  3  :  36.)  “  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath 

everlasting  life,”  with  great  eloquence  and  impressiveness ;  and 
yet  ignore  the  truth  of  the  remaining  statement  “and  he  that  be¬ 
lieveth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth 
on  him,”  as  completely  as  if  it  formed  no  part  of  the  Divine 
Record. 

And  it  is  believed  that  the  advocates  of  this  scheme,  quite 
generally,  adopt  the  same  method  in  dealing  with  impenitent  men. 
They  almost  entirely,  in  preaching,  leave  out  the  terrors  of  per¬ 
dition.  In  so  doing  they  practically  reject  the  evangelical  scheme, 
and  practically  adopt  that  of  the  Universalists. 

This  is  the  calamitous  aspect  of  the  Theory  in  question — It 
assumes  that  the  presentation  of  the  great  truth  that  “  God  is 
angry  with  the  wicked  every  day,”  and  that  “  our  God  is  a  con- 


162 


suming  fire,”  is  unnecessary  ;  and  that  it  is  better,  for  the  most 
part,  to  leave  oat  the  appeal  to  fear  in  dealing  with  ungodly  men. 

With  such  views  this  book  has  no  sympathy,  but  holds  that 
any  theory  or  belief  that  proposes  to  set  aside  the  terrors  of  per¬ 
dition,  either  wholly  or  in  part,  is  false  from  the  foundation,  and 
utterly  at  variance  with  the  entire  spirit  and  letter  of  the  Bible  ; 
and  that  its  practical  influence  in  thus  softening  down  the  threat- 
enings  of  the  Divine  Word,  is  to  smooth  the  broadway  of  sinners 
to  destruction,  and  secure  only  meager  results  in  the  conversion 
of  men. 


Matter  of  Preaching. 

What  is  the  object  of  preaching?  Answer:  To  lead  men  to 
give  up  sinning.  They  love  sin.  They  cling  to  it.  They  will 
not  abandon  it.  They  love  their  own  way,  aud  are  determined  to 
have  it.  How  shall  they  be  deterred  from  following  it,  is  the 
question. 

The  only  way  in  which  this  can  be  done  is  by  giving  them  a 
correct  idea  of  their  position  as  the  enemies  of  God.  As  such  they 
are  arrayed  against  God,  and  must  be  made  to  see  it.  They  are 
breaking  the  great  Law  of  God,  and  daring  its  tremendous  sanc¬ 
tions,  and  should  be  told  of  it  in  so  many  words.  The  wrath  of 
God  is  burning  against  them,  and  they  should  be  made  to  fear  it. 
His  judgments  are  abroad  in  the  earth  against  evil-doing  and 
evil- doers,  and  they  should  be  made  to  fear  lest  judgments  in  a 
more  aggravated  form  will  meet  them  in  the  future  world.  They 
should  be  pressed  with  the  stupendous  fact  that  death,  judg¬ 
ment  and  eternity  are  coming  on,  and  will  soon  overtake  them, 
and  that  there  is  no  escaping  the  endless  consequences  of  sin  in 
the  future  world  but  by  timely  repentance  in  this. 

So  preached  the  men  of  ancient  times  who  penned  the  Bible, 
and  wrote  it  under  the  Divine  direction. 

“  The  wricked  shall  be  turned  into  hell,  and  all  the  nations  that 
forget  God.”  (Is.  9  :  17.) 

“Upon  the  wicked  he  shall  reign  snares  ;  fire  and  brimstone 
and  an  horrible  tempest ;  this  shall  be  the  portion  of  their  cup.” 
(Ps.  11  :  6.) 

“The  sinners  in  Zion  are  afraid;  fearfulness  hath  surprised 
the  hypocrites;  who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  devouring  fire; 
who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  everlasting  burnings.”  (Is.  33  : 
14.) 

“  Thou  art  not  a  God  that  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness,  neither 
shall  evil  dwell  with  thee  ;  the  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  thy  sight ; 
thou  hatest  all  wrorkers  of  iniquity.”  (Ps.  5  :  4,  5.)  And  modern 
preachers  can  do  no  better  than  to  adopt  the  same  decisive  lan¬ 
guage  in  portraying  the  character  of  God. 


163 


Shall  the  minister  attempt  to  draw  men  to  obedience  merely 
by  the  presentation  of  God’s  love  ?  Then  why  did  not  the  Saviour  ? 
Why  did  not  John  in  the  wilderness  who  heralded  his  coming  ?  If 
the  dispensation  which  he  was  ushering  in  was  to  be  merely  one 
of  love ,  why  did  he  not  so  proclaim  it  ?  Instead  of  this  he  says, 
“  Whose  fan  is  in  his  hand,  and  he  will  thoroughly  purge  his  floor, 
and  gather  his  wheat  into  the  garner  ;  but  he  will  burn  up 
the  chaff  with  unquenchable  fire.”  (Matt.  3  :  12.)  And  Christ 
says,  himself,  “I  am  come  to  send  fire  on  the  earth.”  Luke  12  : 
49. 

/ 

Moreover  if  love  is  to]be  the  only  motive,  why  did  the  Saviour 
himself  set  forth  the  punishment  of  the  ungodly  in  such  awful 
representations  ? 

Why  exhaust  the  capacities  of  language  and  imagery  in  pic¬ 
turing  its  dreadfulness — “the  lake  of  fire,”  the  “gnawing  of  their 
tongues  for  pain,”  the  “gnashing  of  teeth,”  the  cry  for  one  drop 
of  water  to  assuage  torment,  and  even  this  denied?  Shall  a  weak 
and  short  sighted  man  undertake  to  improve  on  the  preaching  of 
the  Son  of  God  ? 

What  is  God  himself  now  doing  to  lead  sinful  men  to  abandon 
their  lives  of  ungodliness  ?  Is  he  merely  drawing  them  b}r  the 
cords  of  love ;  merely  proclaiming  his  goodness  and  mercy  and 
loving  kindness  ;  merely  trying  to  soften  their  hard  hearts  by  the 
presentation  of  his  infinite  love  in  Redemption  ?  Then  why  the 
earthquake  that  buries  whole  cities ;  why  the  march  of  the  pesti¬ 
lence  ;  why  the  tornado  with  its  utter  and  awful  visitation  ?  What 
means  the  Almighty  by  these  and  similar  dealings  with  men? 
What  side  of  his  character  is  he  portraying?  What  impressions 
is  he  trying  to  leave  on  the  minds  of  men  respecting  himself? 
What  motives  is  he  appealing  to?  If  not  to  the  motive  of  fear, 
then  what  motive  is  it  ?  And  if  he  is  stirring  men  to  fear  him, 
why  should  not  his  ministering  servant  do  the  same  ? 

Most  certainly  the  motive  of  God’s  final  judgment  upon  the 
ungodly  can  never  be  left  out  of  preaching  without  doing  an  irre¬ 
parable  injury  to  the  cause  of  truth,  and  endangering  the  salvation 
of  sinful  men.  If  men  could  as  well  be  saved  without  presenting 
the  terrors  of  perdition  ;  if  the}"  could  be  drawn  to  repentance  by 
the  presentation  of  Christ’s  tenderness  and  love  merety,  then 
Christ  himself  would  have  adopted  that  method  of  preaching,  for 
his  pitiful  nature  certainly  shrunk  as  much  from  unnecessarily 
wounding  human  sensibilities  as  any  one  of  ours  does.  But  he 
evidently  deemed  the  opposite  method  essential ,  and  everywhere 
in  his  preaching  makes  the  appeal  to  / ear  fully  as  prominent  as 
the  appeal  to  affection  ;  and  his  ministering  servant  can  do  no 
better  than  to  copy  his  example. 

When,  therefore,  he  who  insists  on  presenting  the  love  of 
God  in  Christ  as  the  great  motive  to  obedience,  insists  also  in 


164 


leaving  out  of  his  preaching  the  terrors  of  God’s  warth,  let  him 
understand  that  he  does  not  know  enough  respecting  tlie  necessi¬ 
ties  and  exigencies  of  the  endless  universe  thus  to  tamper  in  his 
pulpit  ministrations  with  the  Word  of  God,  and  keep  back  a 
part,  and  soften  down  its  threatenings,  and  assume  practically 
that  he  knows  better  than  the  Almighty  what  kind  of  preaching 
to  give  men.  What  right  has  he  to  undertake  to  improve  on  the 
preaching  of  the  Saviour  ?  A  due  loyalty  to  his  solemn  commis¬ 
sion  demands  that  he  “  declare  to  men  the  whole  counsel  of  God.” 
(Acts  20  :  27.) 

If,  therefore,  he  is  to  preach  with  clearness  and  impressive¬ 
ness  the  great  truth  that  “  he  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  ever¬ 
lasting  life,”  so  is  he  to  preach  with  equal  clearness  and  earnest¬ 
ness  that  “he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ;  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him”  (John  3:  36.) 

As  a  test  question,  let  every  preacher  of  the  word  ask  himself 
this:  Would  the  views  I  entertain  of  the  atonement  and  of  the 
future  of  the  wicked  lead  me  to  say,  with  Paul,  “  I  ceased  not  to 
warn  every  one  night  and  day  with  tears?”  (Acts  20:  31.)  Or 
does  the  earnestness  of  my  conduct  correspond  with  the  direction 
of  the  Apostle — “Others  save  with  tear  pulling  them  out  of  the 
fire.”  (Jude  23.) 

Verily,  this  is  no  time  for  the  ministry  to  the  faint-hearted ; 
but  rather  a  time  for  utter  fearlessness  in  proclaiming  the  whole 
truth  of  God  respecting  wicked  men.  A  fact  has  been  already 
stated,  that  a  deacon  in  a  prominent  Congregational  Church  in 
one  of  our  large  western  cities,  made  this  remark  in  the  hearing 
of  the  writer,  that  “the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  was  in¬ 
trinsically  absurd.”  Some  eminent  preachers  have  been  giving 
the  strongest  utterances  for  years  in  the  same  direction.  Pres¬ 
ident  Northup,  in  a  sermon  recently  read  before  the  Congrega¬ 
tional  Club  in  Minneapolis,  the  title  of  which  was  “  A  silent  Rev¬ 
olution,”  sums  up  what  he  regards  as  the  present  attitude  of 
the  churches  in  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment, 
in  these  words — “From  all  this  it  appears  that  the  church  has 
made  a  general  movement  in  the  direction  of  modified  Universal- 
ism.”  Also  this — “  And  so — there  is  a  general  consent  that  cer¬ 
tain  doctrines,  once  held  to  be  true,  and  of  vital  importance,  are 
to  be  regarded  as  so  no  longer.” 

The  fact  is  that  the  great  underlying  principles  of '  God’s 
moral  administration  as  developed  in  the  bible,  are  being  lost 
sight  of  by  multitudes  of  professedly  Christian  men.  Starting 
with  their  own  preconceived  opinions  or  philosophical  specula¬ 
tions  of  what  is  just  and  right  and  proper  and  necessary  in  the 
moral  government  of  God,  they  compel  the  Bible  to  fall  in  with 
them,  instead  of  starting  with  the  Bible,  and  making  their  belief 


165 


conform  to  its  plain  teachings.  In  this  way  the  declarations  of 
God’s  Word  are  made  to  suit  their  o  wn  wishes  or  prejudices,  even 
though  to  do  this  requires  it  to  be  toned  down,  softened,  distorted 
and  even  explained  away,  and  made  no  longer  a  plain  book  for  the 
guidance  of  plain,  uneducated  men.  Especially  the  threatening s 
of  Future  and  Endless  Punishment  are  set  aside  as  being  only 
the  teachings  of  superstition  and  delusion  ;  and  all  the  while  “  the 
great  day  of  his  wrath  is  coming  on,  and  who  shall  be  able  to 
to  stand.”  (Rev.  6  :  17.) 

Now,  therefore,  the  trumpet  of  the  Law  and  the  Gospel — for¬ 
giveness  for  the  penitent,  and  endless  perdition  for  the  finally  sin¬ 
ful,  should  be  heard  in  clear  and  earnest  tones  whether  men  will  re¬ 
ceive  it  or  not.  The  evangelical  pulpit  should  give  no  uncertain 
sound  upon  these  fundamental  matters  of  God’s  law  and  govern¬ 
ment — penalty  and  pardon,  salvation  and  damnation.  They  con¬ 
cern  eternal  interests.  They  have  to  do  with  men  going  to  the 
grave  and  the  judgment,  to  Heaven  or  to  Hell.  They  have  to  do 
with  the  character  of  God,  with  the  sanctity  of  his  law,  with  the 
honor  of  the  Saviour,  and  with  all  the  vital  interests  of  his  eternal 
kingdom. 

And  these  things  should  be  set  in  order  before  men,  and  they 
should  be  made  to  see  the  folly,  inconsistency  and  peril  of  sub¬ 
verting  any  one  of  the  great  principles  of  God’s  administration — 
that  to  disturb  a  single  pillar  of  it,  is  to  shake  the  entire  edifice, 
to  destroy  its  harmony  and  consistency,  and  to  render  it  impos¬ 
sible  for  it  to  be  any  longer  the  perfect  work  of  God.  They 
should  be  made  to  see  the  massive  pillars  of  it — Law  and  Penalty, 
Reward  and  Pardon,  all  towering  together  in  such  majestic  pro¬ 
portions  of  greatness,  grandeur,  and  harmony ,  as  to  be  manifestly 
“  a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  moved” 

But  the  minister  should  also  be  moved  with  pity  for  the  per¬ 
ishing,  so  as  to  be  able  to  speak  to  dying  men  with  tenderness 
and  compassion  as  well  as  faithfulness,  even  as  did  the  Saviour.  If 
men  are  going  to  perdition  they  should  be  told  of  it  in  so  many 
words,  yet  in  kindness  as  well  as  plainness.  If  the  anger  of  God 
is  burning  against  them  for  their  sins — if  “judgment  is  only  now 
lingering  and  damnation  slumbering,”  they  should  be  roused  from 
their  stupidity  and  insensibility  by  appeals  which  they  cannot 
misunderstand,  yet  at  the  same  time  spoken  with  solemnity  and 
affection.  That  was  a  terrible  declaration  of  God  to  the  prophet 
Ezekiel,  and  was  meant  for  every  one  of  his  watchmen — “  When 
I  say  unto  the  wicked,  O  wicked  man,  thou  shalt  surely  die ;  if 
thou  dost  not  speak  to  warn  the  wicked  from  his  wray,  that  wicked 
man  shall  die  in  his  iniquity  ;  but  his  blood  will  I  require  at  thine 
hand.”  (Ezekiel  33  :  8.) 


CHAPTER  V. 


The  Redeemed  Church. 

Sec.  1.  The  Relations  of  the  Church  to  the  Angels  of 
Heaven. 

Here  it  will  be  necessary  to  notice  that  remarkable  passage 
in  Eph.  3:  10,  already  quoted  in  other  connections,  but  which  is 
especially  applicable  here — “  To  the  intent  that  now  unto  the 
principalities  and  powers  in  heavenly  places,  might  be  known  by 
the  Church  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God.” 

This  passage  is  worthy  of  special  notice.  The  particular 
points  are — That  the  Plan  of  Redemption,  in  its  exhibition  of  the 
“manifold  wisdom  of  God,”  is  represented  as  sustaining  vital  re¬ 
lations  to  the  unsinning  hosts  of  heaven.  “  The  principalities  and 
powers  in  heavenly  places” — the  angels  and  archangels,  and  all 
the  ranks  of  holy  intelligences  that  surround  the  throne  of  God — 
are  the  ones  immediately  affected  by  it. 

Then  again,  that  the  moral  splendors  of  the  divine  character 
are  finding  their  most  vivid  illustration,  even  to  the  angels  of 
heaven,  through  the  redeemed  Church.  It  is  not  made  merely 
through  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ  himself,  but  by 
means  of  the  penitent  and  pardoned  ones  who  have  been  rescued 
by  him — through  them  it  is  that  God  is  exhibiting  his  “  manifold 
wisdom.” 

Now,  what  God  is  doing  he  always  intended  to  do ;  and  so  it 
comes  out  that  not  sinful  beings  merely,  but  loyal  races  were  or¬ 
iginally  comprehended  in  this  divine  plan ;  that  it  was  made  as 
truly  for  them  as  for  us,  and  that  they  were  destined  from  the 
beginning  to  share  with  us  in  its  eternal  benefits.  Not,  of  course, 
in  the  same  way  that  we  do,  for  they  have  not  sinned  as  we  have, 
and  do  not  need  forgiveness ;  neither  do  they  need  sanctification 
as  we  do,  for  they  are  already  holy.  The  particular  design  of  the 
atonement  in  its  relations  to  them  is  not  revealed,  and  what  it  is 
we  are  left  to  conjecture.  We  only  know  that  through  the 
Church,  as  a  redeemed  Church,  God  is  manifesting  his  character 
and  attributes  to  the  angels  ;  so  that  while  they  are  ministering 
spirits  to  us,  we  are  the  medium  of  Divine  favor  and  blessing  to 
them.  And  the  most  natural  conjecture  is  that  the  wonderful  ex¬ 
hibition  of  affection  which  God  has  made  in  our  redemption  and 


salvation,  is  the  one  indispensable  motive  and  influence  which  has 
kept,  and  will  forever  keep,  them  loyal  to  God.  * 

Enough  now,  apart  from  all  conjecture,  that  in  some  way, 
and  for  some  specific  purpose,  the  great  atonement  by  Jesus 
Christ,  and  through  the  medium  of  the  redeemed  Church,  is  reach¬ 
ing  out  in  its  workings  far  beyond  this  world,  and  laying  hold  on 
the  hosts  of  heaven.  And  if  on  them,  sinless  as  they  are,  then 
why  not  on  all  moral  beings  who  may  be  hereafter  created  ? 

For,  in  the  view  we  are  taking,  the  great  problem  of  eternity 
is,  to  have  a  moral  universe  forever  expanding  by  the  continued 
creation  of  moral  beings — free  moral  agents,  conscious  of  their 
freedom,  and  loving  to  exercise  it — and  still  keep  them  from 
abusing  that  freedom,  and  to  bind  them  in  eternal  loyalty  to  the 
Most  High.  Which  leads  to  the  consideration  of  the  following 
section. 

Sec.  2.  The  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  Future  Universe . 

Here  another  passage  needs  to  be  noticed  w  hich  has  been 
already  quoted  in  previous  connections — “  That  in  the  ages  to 
come  he  might  show  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace  in  his 
kindness  toward  us  through  Christ  Jesus.”  (Eph.  2:7.)  Also 
Rom.  9  :  23 — “  And  that  he  might  make  known  the  riches  of  his 
glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy  which  he  had  afore  prepared  unto 
glory.” 

Notice  here  it  is  the  same  work  of  manifestation  mentioned 
in  the  preceding  section — the  same  process  of  revealing  the 
wonders  and  glories  of  Redemption,  and  through  the  same  in¬ 
strumentality — the  Redeemed  Church.  It  is  his  kindness 
“  toward  us  ”  which  is  the  leading  matter  of  exhibition.  Not 
merely  now  to  the  angels  of  heaven — the  “principalities  and 
powers  in  heavenly  places,”  but  throughout  the  long  ages  of 
eternity,  the  same  wonderful  exhibition  is  to  be  made  of  what 
God  has  done  in  the  work  of  our  Redemption.  And  thus  the 
Redeemed  Church  is  to  be  held  up  forever  to  the  universal  gaze, 
and  through  it  the  infinite  affection  of  the  Godhead  for  this  sin¬ 
ful  world,  is  to  have  an  eternal  exhibition  and  unfolding.  The 
church  is  thus  to  have  a  kind  of  mission  to  the  endless  universe 

*  The  following  striking  passage  occurs  in  the  work  of  Conybeare  and 
Howson:  “  This  statement  of  the  infinite  extent  of  the  results  of  Christ’s 
redemption,  (which  may  well  fill  us  with  reverential  awe,)  has  been  a  sore 
stumbling-block  to  many  commentators,  who  have  devised  various  (and 
some  very  ingenious)  modes  of  explaining  it  away.  Into  these  this  is  not 
the  place  to  enter.  It  is  sufficient  to  observe  that  St.  Paul  is  still  led  to 
set  forth  the  true  greatness  of  Christ  in  opposition  to  the  angelolatry  of 
the  Colossian  heretics,  intimating  that  far  from  Christ’s  being  one  only  of 
the  angelic  hierarchy,  the  heavenly  hosts  themselves  stood  in  need  of  his 
atonement .”  Conybeare  and  Howson,  Yol.  II.,  p.  386,  note  5. 


168 


of  being;  and  even  as  that  same  Church  was  a  “  chosen  genera¬ 
tion  and  a  royal  priesthood  ”  on  earth,  to  “  show  forth  the 
praises”  of  Jehovah,  so  will  it  occupy  the  same  eternal  position. 

And  now  should  the  question  be  asked — What  end  or  ob¬ 
ject  is  to  be  secured  by  such  an  endless  manifestation,  there  is 
but  one  answer  which  appeals  to  meet  all  the  circumstances  of 
the  case,  and  that  is  the  one  already  given — To  make  such  an 
appeal  to  affection  in  this  infinite  sacrifice  of  the  Almighty,  as 
shall  be  sufficient — in  connection  with  the  appeal  to  fear  in  the 
punishment  of  the  ungodly — to  bind  the  endless  and  ever  expand¬ 
ing  universe  of  moral  beings  in  unchanging  loyalty  to  him.  As¬ 
suming  this  to  be  the  real  fact  in  respect  to  the  future  universe, 
and  that  the  redeemed  are  thus  standing  at  the  dawning-time  of 
these  endless  triumphs  of  Redemption,  and  that  all  the  future 
races  of  moral  beings  multiplying  endlessly,  will  owe  their  con¬ 
firmation  in  holiness  to  the  influence  through  them  of  Christ’s 
atoning  sacrifice,  how  significant  becomes  the  expression  in  Rev. 
14:4,  which  characterizes  them  as  being  “the  first  fruits  unto  God 
and  the  Lamb  ” — the  first  in-gathering  of  the  endless  harvest. 

And  so  all  beings  in  all  ages  must  be  ever  gazing  in  rapt  ad¬ 
miration  at  these  monuments  of  the  Divine  Mercy — these  rescued 
and  sanctified  ones  whom  God  has  chosen,  redeemed  and  placed 
at  his  right  hand  as  “  priests,”  and  through  whom  he  is  to  exert 
that  peculiar  influence  which  is  to  bind  the  advancing  universe 
in  eternal  loyalty  to  himself.  As  such  they  are  indeed  “a  chosen 
generation,  a  royal  priesthood,”  to  show  forth  forever  the  praises 
of  the  Most  High. 

Moreover,  they  are  kings  as  well  as  priests,  and  whose  kingly 
authority  will  be  ever  recognized,  even  as  in  an  earthly  kingdom, 
the  royal  prerogatives  are  granted  to  the  ministers  of  the  crown ; 
and  they  occupy,  in  a  certain  sense,  the  very  place  of  the  monarch 
himself.  So  kingly  power  is  bestowed  upon  the  redeemed  Church, 
and  it  rules  and  reigns  with  God,  and  will  be  forever  recognized 
as  his  vicegerent  in  the  future  management  of  universal  affairs  ; 
very  likely  to  be  commissioned  on  errands  of  love  and  mercy  for¬ 
ever  to  all  parts  of  God’s  dominions — the  plenipotentiaries  of  the 
great  central  administration.  This  point  will  be  more  fully  ex¬ 
panded  in  the  following  section.  * 

*  Dr.  Bellamy  seems  to  have  had  some  general  view  of  the  system 
similar  to  the  one  we  have  been  unfolding  when  he  says — “  How  know 
we  if  God  thinks  it  best  to  have  a  larger  number  of  intelligencies  to  be¬ 
hold  his  glory  and  to  be  happy  with  him,  but  that,  he  judges  it  best  not  to 
bring  them  into  existence  till  the  present  ‘ grand  drama’  shall  be  finished 
at  the  day  of  judgment?  That  they  may,  without  sharing  the  hazard  of 
the  present  confused  state  of  things,  reap  the  benefit  of  the  whole  through 
eternal  ages;  whilst  angels  and  saints  may  be  appointed  their  instructors 
to  lead  into  the  knowledge  of  all  God’s  ways  to  his  creatures,  and  all  their 


169 


Sec.  3.  Employments  of  the  redeemed  hereafter. 

It  is  sometimes  objected  to  the  Bible  representations  of  the 
employments  of  Heaven,  that  the  soul  is  so  constituted  as  to  de¬ 
mand  for  its  highest  happiness  an  unending  career  of  usefulness, 
and  that  the  mere  employment  of  praise  fails  fully  to  exercise  its 
vast  and  varied  powers. 

The  Bible,  however,  by  no  means  limits  the  occupations  of 
the  redeemed  to  this-.  It  does  indeed  represent  this  as  their  em¬ 
ployment  in  part ;  and  it  must  necessarily  be ;  for  how  could  a 
soul  redeemed  through  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  restrain  its  gush¬ 
ing  emotions  of  affection  for  its  God  and  Saviour  from  breaking 
out  in  rapturous  expression.  Every  contemplation  of  what  he 
was  in  character,  and  what  he  was  exposed  to  in  the  w^ay  of  pun¬ 
ishment,  compared  with  what  he  is  as  a  forgiven  sinner,  and  what 
he  will  be  through  eternity,  must  fire  his  soul  with  wonder,  grati¬ 
tude  and  exultation;  making  the  new  song  forever  new  ;  swelling 
his  bosom  with  irrepressible  rapture  and  making  him  strike  his 
golden  harp  in  richer  and  still  richer  melody.  But  this  is  only 
one  part  of  his  occupation.  There  is  nothing  whatever  in  the 
Bible  to  militate  against  the  supposition,  that  everything  which 
is  fitted  to  develop  the  powers  of  the  mind  and  unfold  before  it 
the  greatness  and  glory  of  the  Almighty — every  kind  of  research 
into  the  mysteries  of  nature  which  may  be  afforded  in  the  almost 
infinite  variety  of  the  works  of  God — everything  which  tends  to 
exalt  and  ennoble  the  sensibilities  and  draw7  them  out  in  delight¬ 
ful  expression,  will  be  thrown  wide  open  to  the  experience  and 
enjoyment  of  every  redeemed  soul.  “ For  the  Lamb  that  is  in  the 
midst  of  the  throne  shall  feed  them.”  (Rev.  7:17.) 

Perhaps,  however,  those  who  have  attempted,  like  Dick  in 
his  Philosophy  of  a  Future  State,  to  sketch  the  probable  employ¬ 
ment  of  the  soul  hereafter,  have  not  given  sufficient  prominence 
to  that  which  is  its  peculiarly  appropriate  and  delightful  occupa¬ 
tion,  and  have  confined  it  too  much ,  in  their  speculations,  to  the 
contemplation  of  material  things  and  the  study  of  the  natural  sci¬ 
ences. 

Reasoning  from  analogy,  we  should  suppose  that  the  pecu¬ 
liar  employment  wffiich  a  renewTed  and  sanctified  soul  as  such 
most  delighted  in  on  earth,  would  be  the  employment  in  which  it 
would  most  delight  in  Heaven,  and  wTould  be,  therefore,  the  em¬ 
ployment  which  God  vrould  most  probably  give  it. 

What  is  the  peculiar  work  which  above  all  others  delights  the 


ways  to  him,  from  the  time  of  Satan’s  revolt  in  heaven  to  the  final  con¬ 
summation  of  all  things.  And  as  the  Jewish  dispensation  was  introduc¬ 
tory  and  preparatory  to  the  Christian,  so  this  present  universe  may  be 
introductory  and  preparatory  to  one  after  the  day  of  judgment,  almost 
infinitely  larger.” 


170 


soul  of  the  Christian  an  earth  ?  The  answer  unhesitatingly  is, — 
Making  known  to  others  the  wonderful  dealings  of  God  with  him¬ 
self  in  the  way  of  mercy  and  forgiveness,  that  he  may  lead  others 
also  to  love  and  adore  him.  This  is  the  scripture  representation, 
for  says  the  apostle  in  the  passage  already  quoted.  u  Ye  are  a 
chosen  generation,  a  royal  priesthood,  a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar 
people  ;  that  ye  should  show  forth  the  praises  of  him  who  hath 
called  you  out  of  darkness  into  his  marvellous  light/’  (1  Pet. 

2  :  9.) 

And  furthermore,  no  conceivable  employment  more  perfectly 
accords  with  Christian  principle  and  character  ;  for  benevolent 
action  appears  to  be,  tire  necessary  expression  of  the  Christian 
life.  The  thing  which  above  all  others  ministers  to  the  happiness 
of  one  who  has  been  renewed  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  is  to  follow  in 
the  footsteps  of  his  Divine  Master  and  “  do  good  ”  And  the  par¬ 
ticular  kind  of  good  which  most  delights  him,  is  that  which  has 
for  its  direct  object  the  glory  of  the  Redeemer  ;  and  therefore,  as 
has  been  said,  the  gushing  emotions  of  his  heart  find  no  more 
natural  or  joyful  expression,  than  when,  by  proclaiming  to  others 
what  has  been  done  for  himself  as  a  redeemed  sinner,  he  can  win 
them  also  to  the  love  of  his  Saviour. 

The  present  theory  proposes  this  as  the  grand  employment 
of  the  redeemed  hereafter  and  forever — making  known  to  newly 
created  beings  the  love  and  mercy  of  God  as  exhibited  in  their  own 
salvation ,  and  thus  “  showing  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace  in 
his  kindness  toward  them  through  Christ  Jesus.”  (Eph.  2  :  7.) 

Nor  does  this  appear  in  any  great  degree  improbable.  It  is 
by  no  means  incredible  that,  in  time  to  come,  moral  beings  may 
be  created,  and  be  as  liable  to  transgression  as  were  Adam  and  the 
fallen  angels ;  and  if  tney  should  be,  that  the  redeemed  from 
among  men  may  be  employed  on  a  mission  of  love  and  mercy  to* 
them,  as  the  angels  are  and  have  been  to  the  inhabitants  of  this 
world.  Nor  is  it  improbable,  that  beings  thus  situated  could  be 
very  much  influenced  in  their  future  conduct,  by  the  representa¬ 
tions  which  might  be  made  to  them  by  redeemed  souls,  of  the  in¬ 
finite  kindness  and  compassion  of  God,  and  even  be  led  byr  it,  so 
to  regard  his  character  and  so  to  admire  this  wonderful  exhibition 
of  his  perfections,  as  to  yield  themselves  to  him  in  cheerful  obe¬ 
dience,  when  otherwise  they  would  not. 

At  all  events,  the  explicit  declaration  of  the  Bible  is,  that  God 
is.  in  some  w7ay,  by  means  of  the  redeemed  Church,  to  make  an  ex¬ 
hibition  in  the  ages  to  come”  of  “  the  exceeding  riches  of  his 
grace and  to  whatever  beings  this  exhibition  is  to  be  made,  it  is 
hardly  conceivable  that  the  very  subjects  of  salvation  should  per¬ 
form  no  active  part  in  such  a  manifestation  ;  especially  w7hen  such 
an  employment  vvrould  be  to  them  so  surpassingly  delightful.  It  is 
hardly  conceivable  that  God  should  merely  array  them  before  the 


171 


universe,,  to  be  gazed  at  as  the  objects  of  his  redeeming  mercy, 
while  they  themselves  remain  silent.  It  seems  far  more  natural 
that  he  should  employ  them  directly  in  making  known  to  others 
the  wonderful  love  which  God  had  shown  to  them,  and  send  them 
abroad  through  his  universe  to  proclaim  his  “  manifold  wisdom” 
and  the  “exceeding  riches  of  his  grace”  in  their  salvation. 

And  so  we  conclude  it,  at  least,  possible,  that  this  exalted 
employment  may  be  ours  hereafter,  to  go  from  world  to  world  as 
they  are  successively  peopled  with  moral  beings,  telling  ever  the 
story  of  redemption — proclaiming  ever  the  love  and  mercy  of  Him, 
“  who  hath  redeemed  us  to  God  by  his  blood,”  and  singing  ever  the 
“new  song,”  “Worthy  is  the  Lamb,”  and  all  to  lead  them  to  the 
love  and  praise  of  the  same  adorable  Redeemer. 

This  view  opens  before  us,  in  the  future  world,  a  career  of 
usefulness,  benevolence  and  blessedness  so  magnificent,  that  the 
Christian  heart  can  ask  for  nothing  more,  for  it  can  conceive  of 
nothing  more  perfectly  corresponding  with  the  highest  aspira¬ 
tions  of  its  own  sanctified  nature. 

It  discerns  in  this  the  employment  that  it  most  loves  on  earth, 
and  would  most  desire  to  have  prolonged  through  eternity.  And 
it  may  be  thus  prolonged,  for  there  may  be  an  eternity  of  creation 
as  well  as  of  time,  and  as  space  is  unbounded,  so  may  the  work  of 
creation  be  without  end. 

And  what  a  result !  What  glory  would  accrue  to  the  Blessed 
Redeemer  and  to  us  who  are  to  share  in  his  exaltation,  to  behold 
worlds  on  worlds  forever  coming  into  existence,  and  successively 
peopled  with  intelligent  beings,  and  the  happiness  of  all  depending 
on  the  love  and  mercy  of  God  as  exhibited  in  our  redemption. 

The  spontaneous  expression  of  the  Christian  heart  in  the  con¬ 
templation  of  such  a  result  seems  to  be,  not,  “  is  it  not  improba¬ 
ble,  ”  but  umay  I  believe  it  p>ossible  ?”  And  the  answer  is,  nei¬ 
ther  reason  nor  revelation  contain  anything  which  militates  against 
such  a  supposition. 

Is  it  objected,  that  this  gives  the  redeemed  too  prominent  and 
important  a  position  in  the  divine  administration  ? 

No  more  so,  it  is  replied,  than  the  Bible  gives  them.  The 
Bible  makes  them  “  chosen  of  God  and  precious ,”  and  chosen  too 
for  the  noblest  of  all  conceivable  employments — that  of  “  showing 
forth  the  praises  of  him  who  hath  called  them  out  of  darkness 
into  his  marvelous  light  /”  andthe  present  supposition  only  gives 
them  in  Heaven  and  through  eternity,  the  same  delightful  em¬ 
ployment  which  God  has  given  them  on  earth. 

Sec.  4.  The  Church  a  partaker  of  the  Divine  Nature. 

A  very  wonderful  statement  respecting  the  Church  is  found 
in  2  Pet.  1:4,  “  That  ye  might  be  partakers  of  the  Divine  Nature .” 


172 


What  is  implied  in  this?  Answer  :  That  the  Church  is  a  partaker 
of  the  internal  character,  relations  and  experience  of  the  Godhead; 
that  is,  its  internal  character  of  benevolence ,  its  internal  relations  of 
affection ,  and  its  internal  experience  of  blessedness. 

1.  Of  character.  “  God  is  love ;”  that  is,  he  is  a  being  whose 
character  is  that  of  perfect  and  universal  benevolence — the  out¬ 
going  of  whose  infinite  heart  is  ever  in  the  direction  of  securing  to 
the  highest  extent  possible,  the  holiness  and  happiness  of  his  en¬ 
tire  moral  creation.  Before  conversion,  a  man  is  ready  to  sacrifice 
the  welfare  and  happiness  of  the  Almighty,  and  of  the  entire 
universe  to  his  own  personal  inclinations.  In  conversion  this  state 
of  character  is  reversed,  and  he  comes  to  have  the  same  moral 
character  as  God  in  its  fundamental  element.  He  becomes  truly 
a  benevolent  man,  ready  to  sacrifice  every  thing  to  the  glory  of 
God,  and  the  welfare  of  men,  and  thus  becomes  a  partaker  of  the 
Divine  Nature  in  its  internal  Character ;  as  says  the  Apostle  in 
Heb.  12:  10 — “  Partakers  of  his  holiness .” 

2.  Of  Affection.  Affection  grows  out  of  personal  relations. 
The  father  loves  his  children,  and  the  children  love  the  parent  on 
account  of  the  personal  relations  which  they  sustain  to  each  other. 
So  there  is  among  the  different  persons  of  the  Godhead  a  similar 
kind  of  domestic  affection.  The  Father  loves  the  Son,  and  the 
Son  the  Father — “  For  thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world.”  (John  17 :  24.)  Now  sometimes  an  earthly  parent 
adopts  a  child,  and  comes  in  time  to  have  the  same  affection  for 
him  as  for  his  own  children.  And  the  adopted  child  comes  to 
love  the  parent  and  the  other  members  of  the  family,  and  they 
him,  just  as  if  he  were  a  natural  child.  So  the  Church  has  been 
adopted  into  the  family  of  the  Godhead  ;  “  That  we  might  receive 
the  adoption  of  sons”  (Gal.  4  :  5.),  and  is  loved  by  them  with  the 
same  affection  which  they  have  for  each  other  ;  “  And  has  loved 
them  as  thou  hast  loved  me.”  (John  17:23.)  And  thus  the  Church 
becomes  a  partaker  of  the  Divine  Nature,  in  its  internal  relations 
of  affection. 

3.  Of  Blessedness.  The  prayer  of  the  Saviour  was  “  That 
they  might  have  my  joy  fulfilled  in  themselves,”  (John  17  :  13.) 
Not  a  part  of  it,  but  have  his  joy  fulfilled — the  full  measure  of  his 
blessedness.  What  was  that  “joy”  that  in  full  view  of  the  garden 
and  the  cross  could  yet  fill  him  with  such  heavenly  exaltation, 
and  even  exultation?  Several  elements  entered  into  it,  but 
mainly  that  of  having  finished  his  work ,  and  finished  it  satisfac¬ 
torily.  “  I  have  finished  the  work  which  thou  gavest  me  to  do 
(John  17:4.)  So  also  he  had  said  before  this  at  the  well  of 
Samaria,  “My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me  and  to 
finish  his  work.”  (John  4:34.)  And  at  this  point  the  Church 
enters  into  the  very  blessedness  of  the  Redeemer,  and  becomes  a 
“partaker  of  the  Divine  Nature.”  Hear  Paul  in  his  contemplated 


173 


visit  to  Jerusalem,  going  straight  into  anticipated  bonds,  impris¬ 
onment  and  death — hear  the  language  of  his  calm  and  trusting 
heart — “But  none  of  these  things  move  me,  neither  count  I  my 
life  dear  unto  myself,  so  that  I  might  finish  my  course  with  joy.” 
(Acts  21 :  24.)  And  his  exultation  finds  a  still  grander  expression 
in  2  Tim.  4:  7,  8 — “I  have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  finished 
my  course,  I  have  kept  the  faith.”  O  how  surpassingly  wonder¬ 
ful  is  the  joy  of  the  Christian  as  he  draws  near  the  end  of  his 
course,  and  looks  back  upon  a  life  consecrated  to  the  Master  in 
obedience,  love  and  service. 

Nor  let  him  imagine  that  the  memory  of  his  failings  and  im¬ 
perfections  and  short-comings  is  to  come  in  then  to  darken  and 
sadden  the  experience  of  the  dying  hour.  No  matter  what  he 
has  left  undone,  the  great,  grand  fact  yet  remains  that  he  has 
accepted  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  believed  in  him  as  his  own 
Redeemer.  Said  the  Saviour — u  This  is  the  work  of  God  that  ye 
believe  on  him  whom  he  hath  sent.'1'1  (John  6  :  29.)  “This  the 
work” — For  this  God  made  him,  and  put  him  into  this  world,  pre¬ 
eminently  that  he  might  do  this  greatest  and  grandest  work  of  all 
— believing  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and  he  has  done  it.  And 
now  the  remembrance  of  that  fact  will  sweep  through  his  soul 
with  unutterable  joy  in  spite  of  all  his  short  comings.  Even  the 
very  perception  of  his  unworthiness  will  only  endear  the  Savior 
to  him  all  the  more,  and  open  to  still  deeper  depths  the  fountain 
of  his  blessedness.  And  so  in  the  perception — in  the  felt  con¬ 
sciousness  of  having  thus  finished  the  great  work  God  gave  him 
to  do — that  of  having  accepted  of  Christas  his  Saviour,  and  be¬ 
lieved  in  him,  he  becomes  a  partaker  of  the  Divine  Nature  in  its 
internal  experience  of  Blessedness. 

But  there  was  another  element  in  the  Saviour’s  blessedness, 
which  is  thus  brought  out  in  Heb.  12  :  2,  “  Who  for  the  joy  set 
before  him  endured  the  cross,  &c.”  There  was  not  only  a  joy  in 
the  retrospect,  at  having  finished  his  work,  but  an  overpowering 
joy  at  what  was  yet  before  him — the  anticipated  results  of  his 
life,  sufferings  and  death.  Says  Isaiah — “  He  shall  see  of  the  tra¬ 
vail  of  his  soul  and  shall  be  satisfied”  (53  :  11.)  That  is  he  shall 
see  such  magnificent  results  flowing  from  his  life  and  work  and 
death,  as  shall  even  “  satisfy  ”  the  Redeemer  for  all  his  mighty 
sufferings.  This  was  “  the  joy  set  before  him.”  A  similar  joy  is 
set  before  the  Christian.  Says  Paul,  in  his  anticipation  of  future 
glory — “ Henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteous¬ 
ness  which  the  Lord  the  righteous  Judge  shall  give  me  at  that 
day,  and  not  to  me  only  but  unto  all  them  also  that  love  his  ap¬ 
pearing,”  (2  Tim.  4:  8.) 

And  so  all  the  redeemed  church  will  have  a  similar  experi¬ 
ence.  They  are  “a  crown  of  glory  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and 
a  royal  diadem  in  the  hand  of  God  ;”  (Is.  62 :  3.)  and  God  hinr- 


174 


self  esteems  nothing  so  precious  as  “  The  riches  of  the  glory  of 
his  inheritance  in  the  saints.”  (Eph.  1:  18.) 

Here  we  get  a  glimpse  of  what  the  Apostle  saw  in  the  heav¬ 
enly  vision  which  God  gave  him  of  the  final  exaltation  of  the  re¬ 
deemed,  and  which  comes  out  in  that  overpowering  utterance  of 
his — “  A  far  more  exceeding  and  eternal  weight  of  glory .”  Verily 
“  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  have  entered  into  the 
heart  of  man,  the  things  which  God  hath  prepared  for  them  that 
love  him.”  (1  Cor.  2:  9.)  To  the  consideration  of  this  we  now 
come. 

Sec.  5.  The  Final  Exaltation  of  the  Redeemed  Church. 

In  describing  the  future  glory  and  exaltation  of  the  Redeemed 
Church,  the  scriptures  exhaust  the  capacities  of  language. 

1.  The  Church  is  to  be  the  eternal  companion  of  Christ. 
“Father  I  will  that  they  also  whom  thou  hast  given  me  be  with 
me  where  I  am ;  that  they  may  behold  my  glory,  which  thou  hast 
given  me  ;  (John  17 :  24.)  and  they  “follow  the  Lamb  whiterso- 
ever  he  goethC  (Rev.  14:  4.) 

2.  The  different  members  of  the  Trinity  bestow  the  same 
degree  of  affection  upon  the  Church  that  they  do  upon  each  other. 
“  And  hast  loved  them  as  thou  hast  loved  me.”  (John  17  :  23.) 
“As  the  Father  hath  loved  me,  so  have  I  loved  you.”  (John 
15:9.) 

3.  They  are  Priests  unto  God.  “  They  shall  be  priests  of 
God  and  of  Christ.”  (Rev.  20  :  6.)  The  priest  was  one  who  stood 
between  God  and  the  people — the  Divine  representative — the  dis¬ 
penser  of  spiritual  blessings — the  medium  of  communication  be¬ 
tween  him  and  them.  So,  in  the  general  view  we  are  taking,  the 
Church  will  be  the  High  Priest  of  the  universe  ;  the  medium  of 
communication  between  God  and  the  future  races  of  moral  beings, 
and  the  channel  through  which  will  flow  the  mightiest  blessings 
which  God  himself  can  confer  upon  them — even  those  peculiar 
motives  and  influences  which  are  to  bind  them  to  God  and  holi¬ 
ness  and  blessedness  forever  more.  Moreover,  so  exalted  is  their 
position  in  this  regard,  that  they  are  called  a  “royal  priesthood,” 
invested  with  kingly  prerogatives,  so  as  to  become  “kings  and 
priests  unto  God.”  As  says  the  Apostle  in  Rev.  1 :  5,6 — “Unto 
him  that  loved  us  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood, 
and  hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God  and  his  Father.” 

4.  They  are  “heirs  of  God  and  joint- heirs  with  Christ”  and 
both  are  “glorified  together .”  (Rom.  8:  17.)  This  characteristic 
is  repeatedly  mentioned.  “  Wherefore  thou  art  no  more  a  serv¬ 
ant  but  a  son ;  and  if  a  son,  then  an  heir  of  God  through  Christ.” 
(Gal.  4  :  7.)  Also  “  heirs  of  the  kingdom  ;”  “heirs  together  of  the 
grace  of  life.”  Whatever,  therefore,  Christ  inherits  of  all  the  treas- 


175 

ures  of  the  universe,  by  virtue  of  his  relations  to  the  Father, 
the  redeemed  are  also  to  inherit.  Being  “ joint  heirs  with  him,” 
they  inherit  the  universe  together  with  him.  “  He  that  overcometh 
shall  inherit  all  things.'1'1  (Rev.  21:  7.) 

5.  The  church  is  to  be  the  owner  and  proprietor  with  God 
of  the  entire  universe.  “  All  things  are  yours  whether  things 
present  or  thmgs  to  come ;  all  are  yours ;  And  ye  are  Christ’s  and 
Christ  is  God’s.”  (1  Cor.  3:  21-23.) 

6.  The  Church  is  to  occupy  the  throne  of  the  universe  with 
the  Godhead,  and  to  hold  a  veritable  position  of  authority  over 
the  entire  creation  of  God.”  To  him  that  overcometh  will  I 
grant  to  sit  with  me  in  my  throne ,  even  as  I  also  overcame  and 
am  set  down  with  my  Father  in  his  throne.”  (Rev.  3 :  21.) 

Neither  is  it  to  be  a  mere  temporary  arrangement,  but  an 
eternal  position  of  rule  and  authority,  “And  there  shall  be  no 
night  there  ;  and  they  need  no  candle,  neither  light  of  the  sun  ; 
for  the  Lord  God  giveth  them  light,  and  they  shall  reign  for  ever 
and  every  (Rev.  22:  5.) 

7.  The  Church  is  to  have  all  the  greatness  and  grandeur 
and  glory  of  the  Godhead  itself  put  upon  it — even  the  infinite 
glory  of  the  Almighty.  For  says  the  Saviour  in  his  last  prayer — 
“The  glory  which  thou  gavest  me,  I  have  given  them.”  (John 
17  :  22.)  Now  what  glory  did  God  put  upon  his  Son?  Answer  : 
“|He  raised  him  from  the  dead  and  set  him  at  his  own  right  hand 
in  the  heavenly  places  Far  above  all  principality,  and  power 
and  might  and  dominion,  and  every  name  that  is  named  not  only 
in  this  world,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to  come  ;  And  hath  put 
all  things  under  his  feet,  and  gave  him  to  be  head  over  all  things 
to  the  Church.”  (Eph.  1:  20-22.) 

Nowr  the  point  is  that  all  the  glory  which  God  has  given 
Christ,  and  which  is  brought  out  in  the  preceding  statement, 
Christ  has  given  the  Church — even  the  glory  of  the  Infinite  One. 
How  truly  is  the  glory  of  the  Redeemed  Church  “that  far  more 
exceeding  and  eternal  weight  of  glory  ?” 

8.  The  Church  is  to  be  a  habitation  “  of  the  Almighty  in 
which  he  will  dwell.”  “  Ye  arebuilded  together  for  a  habitation  of 
God.”  “  Ye  are  the  temple  of  the  living  God  ;  as  God  hath  said, 
‘  I  will  dwell  in  them  and  walk  in  them’.”  (2  Cor.  6  :  16.)  This  un¬ 
doubtedly  is  strong  figurative  language,  but  is  evidently  designed 
to  indicate  the  most  intimate  and  eternal  indwelling  and  compan¬ 
ionship. 

9.  The  Church  is  declared  to  be  “  the  fulness  of  him  that 
filleth  all  in  all.”  (Eph.  1:  23.) 

This  is  a  very  remarkable  expression,  and  one  difficult  to  be 
explained.  Notice  here  first — That  the  infinite  perfections  of  the 
Godhead  are  fully  asserted — “  He  filleth  all  in  all ;  ”  and  now 
how  can  the  church  be  the  fidness  of  the  Infinite  Jehovah?  For 


176 


the  passage  reads  as  if,  without  the  church,  there  wras  a  want  of 
completeness  and  fulness — as  if  the  church  came  in  to  complete 
or  fill  up  a  something  in  which  the  Godhead  was  lacking  without 
it;  and  as  though  the  fulness  or  completeness  of  God  was  only 
reached  through  and  by  means  of  the  redeemed  church.  * 

This  is  a  wonderful  statement,  and  how  it  can  be  made  to 
appear  reasonable  is  not  clear.  An  answer  is  attempted,  or  rather 
merely  suggested  in  the  light  of  the  general  plan  of  the  universe 
herein  developed. 

In  the  view  already  presented,  the  grand  work  of  eternity  is 
to  be  that  of  saving  from  apostasy  the  newly-created  races  of 
future  ages  and  of  future  worlds.  This  work  can  only  be  accom¬ 
plished  by  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  perfections  ;  and  par¬ 
ticularly  that  manifestation  made  in  the  redemption  and  salvation 
of  sinners — that  wonderful  and  overpowering  exhibition  of  God’s 
infinite  affection  for  the  sinful  of  this  world. 

Now  how  can  such  a  manifestation  be  made?  Obviously  it 
is  not  possible  to  manifest  affection  for  sinful  beings  until  such 
beings  have  been  created,  and  have  been  made  the  objects  of  affec¬ 
tion.  So,  in  that  sense,  it  is  nothing  derogatoiy  to  the  Divine 
perfections  to  say  that  God  is  dependent,  as  it  wrere,  on  their  ex¬ 
istence  and  redemption  for  such  a  manifestation — that  the  grand 
object  he  is  aiming  to  secure  cannot  be  reached  w  ithout  them ;  so 
that  they  are  thus  essential  to  securing  that  object  and  cannot  be 
dispensed  with.  Because  the  only  manifestation  which  the  infin¬ 
ite  affection  of  God  has  ever  had  or  ever  will  have,  is  through  the 
medium  of  the  redeemed  church ;  for  “  Christ  dieth  no  more” 
“  He  died  unto  sin  once”  and  once  only. 

Now  the  motive  or  influence  derived  from  human  redemption, 
in  the  view  we  are  taking,  is  absolutely  indispensable  to  keep  the 
future  races  of  the  universe  from  apostasy  ;  and,  therefore,  God 
must  have  the  redeemed  church  to  be  the  medium  of  his  mani¬ 
fested  affection.  Therefore,  God  intends  to  find  in  the  church 
that  “  fulness  ”  which  is  necessary  for  saving  the  future  universe 
of  moral  beings.  In  this  view  he  cannot  save  the  endless  universe 
without  the  instrumentality  of  the  church  ;  and,  therefore,  is  it 
spoken  of  as  coming  in  to  assist  in  this  stupendous  w7ork ;  and  the 
“  fulness  of  God  spoken  of  consists  in  the  addition  to  himself  of 
the  agency  and  instrumentality  of  the  redeemed  church  in  this 
peculiar  work.  And  so  he  calls  it  his  “ fulness  ”  or  completeness, 
as  that  without  which,  for  the  uses  of  the  future  universe  in  the 
line  of  salvation,  he  w7ould  be,  of  himself  alone,  insufficient  and  in¬ 
complete.  And  so  the  church  becomes  the  “fulness”  or  com¬ 
pleteness  of  him  who  yet  “  filleth  all  in  all.” 

*  “  This  is  the  highest  honor  of  the  church — that  the  Son  of  God  re¬ 
gards  himself  as,  in  a  certain  sense,  imperfect  unless  he  is  joined  to  us .” 
(Calvin’s  commentary  on  Eph.  1:23.) 


177 


10.  The  redeemed  are  to  be  hereafter  “  sons  of  God,”  and  to 
sustain  to  him  the  same  nominal  relation  that  Christ  himself  does. 
Christ  is  called  the  “Son of  God  and  of  the  redeemed  it  says — 
“  He  that  overcometh  shall  inherit  all  things,  and  I  will  be  his  God 
and  he  shall  be  my  son."  (Rev.  21  :  7.) 

11.  Another  declaration  seems  to  represent  the  Church  as 
sustaining  to  the  Godhead  still  more  intimate  relations.  The 
redeemed  are  spoken  of  as  having  been  adopted  unto  the  Divine 
family,  “That  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons,”  (Gal.  4:5.) 
“  Having  predestinated  us  into  the  adoption  of  children.”  (Eph 
1:5.)  The  representation  here  clearly  is  that  the  redeemed 
Church  are  to  be  members  of  the  Divine  family,  somewhat  as 
children  are  now  not  uncommonly  adopted  into  our  families,  and 
as  adopted  children  share  in  all  the  privileges  and  blessings  of 
the  other  members  of  the  family. 

12.  And  there  is  still  a  representation  in  the  prayer  of  the 
Saviour  which  seems  to  carry  the  intimacy  of  the  relation  a  step 
farther.  “  That  they  may  be  one  even  as  \ye  are  one.”  “  In  them 
and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  made  perfect  in  one."  “  That 
they  all  may  be  one  as  thou  Father  art  in  me  and  I  in  thee,  that 
they  also  may  be  one  in  us"  (John  17:21-23.)  There  seems  to 
be  a  something  indicated  in  these  passages  in  respect  to  the  rela¬ 
tion  of  the  redeemed  Church  to  the  Godhead,  transcending  the 
relation  of  children  or  heirs  or  adopted  sons — a  union  with  the 
Godhead  itself  in  some  strange  and  mysterious  manner,  which  it 
may  not  be  advisable  or  profitable  to  undertake  either  to  explain 
or  even  characterize.  In  section  4,  of  this  chapter,  the  expression 
“partakers  of  the  Divine  nature”  was  explained  to  mean — par 
takers  of  its  internal  character  of  benevolence ,  its  internal  rela¬ 
tions  of  affection ,  and  its  internal  experience  of  blessedness.  The 
expression  may  mean  something  beyond  this — a  union  with  the 
nature  itself  ;  and  that  the  Church  is  to  sustain  hereafter  a  rela¬ 
tion  to  the  Godhead  as  mysterious  and  wonderful  as  the  relation 
of  the  individual  members  of  the  Trinity  to  each  other.  On  this 
point  speculation  is  useless  and  unprofitable.  At  the  same  time, 
in  studying  the  foregoing  expressions,  they  seem  almost  as  if 
designed  to  represent  the  Church  as  an  additional  personality  in 
the  Godhead  itself  ;  and  so  entering  into  it,  and  being  united  to 
it,  as  to  make  it  hereafter  and  forever  a  Fourfold  Unity. 


8 


CHAPTER  VI. 


Plan  of  the  Universe. 

Says  Dr.  Edward  Beecher,  “  A  complete  system  of  the  uni¬ 
verse,  is  a  natural  want  of  the  mind.” 

In  the  progress  of  the  discussion  thus  far,  a  possible,  if  not 
a  probable  Plan  of  the  Universe  has  been  developed, which  it  may 
be  interesting  to  present  at  a  single  view. 

1.  That  the  Moral  System  is  yet  in  its  infancy — the  Fallen 
Angels,  the  Human  Race,  and  the  Unfallen  Angels  being  the  only 
moral  intelligencies  as  yet  created. 

2.  That  the  only  trouble  with  it  is  the  innate  tendency  of  all 
free  mind  to  break  away  from  the  necessary  restraints  of  Law  and 
Government. 

3.  That  at  the  commencement  of  the  moral  universe,  there 
were  not  such  motives  in  existence  as  would  deter  moral  beings 
from  gratifying  this  inclination,  and  from  daring  the  experiment 
of  transgression  ;  although  amply  sufficient  to  render  them  inf  x- 
cusable  in  so  doing.  In  other  words,  the  firmness  of  God  in  the 
execution  of  pena  ty,  and  his  mercy  in  pardon,  had  received  no 
such  illustration  as  would  either  win  them  to  obedience  or  deter 
them  from  rebellion ;  nor,  at  tbe  commencement  of  the  moral  cre¬ 
ation,  was  such  illustration  possible.  Herein  do  we  find  the  ex¬ 
planation  of  the  Origin  of  Sin,  so  far  as  any  explanation  is  pos¬ 
sible. 

4.  That  the  punishment  of  the  rebel  angels,  manifesting 
God’s  determination  to  uphold  the  majesty  of  his  law  and  the  au¬ 
thority  of  his  government,  has  laid  securely  one  of  the  great  foun 
dation  stones  of  a  successful  moral  administration  ;  while  the  cie 
ation  and  subsequent  redemption  of  the  human  race,  bringing  out 
the  crowning  glory  of  the  Divine  Character — compassion  for  the 
sinful,  has  laid  securely  another  one  of  the  foundation  stones  of 
his  moral  administration;  and  that  thus  tfrese  two  experiments 
with  sinning  beings — the  Fallen  Angels  and  the  Human  Race ; 
the  one  the  experiment  of  freedom  under  an  economy  of  Law,  the 
other  of  freedom  under  an  economy  of  Grace,  furnishing,  in  their 
results,  an  iu  finite  appeal  to  fear  on  the  one  hand  and  affection  on 
the  other,  are  indispensable  to  the  confirmation  of  all  newly  ere 
ated  beings  in  holiness  and  happiness  in  all  worlds  forever. 

5.  That  the  great  work  of  the  universe,  and  which  God  has 
now  in  hand,  is  the  development  of  a  kind  and  amount  of  motive 
from  these  dealings  with  the  sinful  in  the  way  of  judgment  and 
mercy,  which  will  be  sufficient,  at  length,  in  connection  with  the 


179 


workings  of  the  Infinite  Spirit,  to  restrain  the  tendency  in  newly- 
created  beings  to  break  away  from  the  law  and  authority  of  God. 
Furthermore,  to  accomplish  this,  not  merely  for  a  single  being,  or 
a  single  world  of  beings,  but  for  all  the  countless  myriads  who 
will  eventually  people  the  great  empire  of  Jehovah. 

6.  That  the  experiment  with  this  wicked  world  must  go  on 
till  this  amount  of  motive  is  secured ;  and  that  the  accomplish¬ 
ment  of  this  object  will  be  the  signal  for  winding  up  of  human 
affairs. 

7.  That  after  the  judgment  of  this  world,  this  end  will  have 
been  reached ;  and  the  dealings  of  God  with  rebel  angels  and  im¬ 
penitent  men,  but  above  all  his  dealings  with  redeemed  sinners, 
will,  together,  make  such  a  fearful  and  impressive,  as  well  as  ten¬ 
der  and  melting  display  of  God’s  character, that  no  newly  created 
being  will  think  of  withstanding  it;  and  when  he  is  made  fully  to 
apprehend  what  God  has  done,  written  out  as  the  history  of  it  will 
be  upon  the  records  of  eternity,  and  the  redeemed  and  the  damned 
being  living  witnesses  to  the  truth  of  it,  all  thought  of  rebellion 
will  be  forever  banished  from  his  mind. 

8.  That  then,  after  the  judgment,  God  will  proceed  with  the 
work  of  creating  moral  beings  through  infinite  duration,  seeing 
that  the  certainty  will  then  be  secured  of  their  remaining  obedient, 
and  therefore  supremely  blessed  ;  and  so  the  universe  will  go  on 
expanding  in  holiness  and  happiness  forever. 

Such  are  the  main  features  of  the  plan  suggested  upon  which 
God  is  building  the  universe  of  mind,  and  which,  it  is  believed, 
embraces  within  itself  all  the  main  facts  and  intimations  both  of 
reason  and  revelation. 

Shall  it  be  accepted  as  th z  probable  plan  of  the  Universe  ? 

First — There  is  a  great  universal  plan  embracing  in  itself  all 
the  facts  of  Reason  and  Revelation.  Now, 

Secondly — If  any  facts  of  Reason  or  Revelation  cannot  be 
comprehended  in  the  plan  herein  developed,  then  it  must  be  given 
up.  But 

Thirdly — If  all  the  facts  both  of  Reason  and  Revelation  can 
be  comprehended  in  it,  then  is  there  this  very  strong  and  well-nigh 
conclusive  reason  for  its  acceptance. 

Fourthly — If  any  modification  can  be  suggested  making  it 
harmonize  better  with  existing  facts,  such  modification  is  to  be 
accepted. 

If  any  plan  can  be  constructed  better  comprehending  within 
itself  all  the  facts  both  of  reason  and  revelation,  then  such  plan 
should  be  adopted,  as  being  on  that  account  the  more  probable. 

But  until  such  plan  or  modification  is  suggested,  or  some  new 
facts  are  discovered,  let  the  foregoing  be  accepted  as  the  probable 
Plan  of  the  Universe. 


The  End. 


I 


APPENDIX  A. 

Hereditary  Depravity. 

By  Hereditary  Depravity  is  meant  that  mankind  become 
sinners  on  account  of  some  kind  of  a  connection  with  sinful 
Adam.  It  is  proposed  now  to  substitute  in  the  place  of  this,  as 
the  occasion  of  sin  in  all  moral  beings,  the  love  of  conscious 
freedom,  and  a  consequent  disincliuation  to  submit  to  the  neces¬ 
sary  restraints  of  law  and  government. 

Some  may  object  to  this  substitution  on  the  ground  that  an 
acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of  Hereditary  Depravity  is  necessary 
to  a  belief  in  the  “solidarity  of  the  race.”  But  the  solidarity  of 
the  race  appears  to  depend  merely  on  hereditary  descent ;  and 
this  may  apparently  exist  without  any  transmission  of  depraved 
tendencies.  To  reject,  therefore,  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  de¬ 
pravity,  is  not  necessarily  to  reject  the  solidarity  of  the  race,  nor 
to  take  a  position  distinctively  Pelagian. 

Others  again  may  object  to  this  substitution  on  the  ground 
that  it  sacrifices  the  doctrine  of  Federal  Headship.  This  doc¬ 
trine  has  sometimes  been  held  in  such  irrational  and  obnoxious 
forms  that  almost  any  possible  substitution  must  be  for  the  bet¬ 
ter.  But  it  is  not  proposed  to  set  this  aside,  but  only  to  modify 
it.  There  is  undoubtedly  a  great  fundamental  truth  in  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  Federal  Headship.  Doubtless  Adam  stood,  in  some 
important  sense  as  the  head  or  representative  of  the  race,  per¬ 
haps  on  this  wise — Adam  having  been  placed  in  the  best  possible 
circumstances  for  securing  salvation,  the  fact  that  he  sinned 
showed  that  any  other  moral  beings,  at  that  stage  of  the  uni¬ 
verse,  would  also  sin.  Human  nature,  therefore,  in  this  view, 
had,  as  it  were,  a  trial  in  him — the  experiment  with  him  demon¬ 
strating  that  moral  beings,  in  this  world,  could  not  consistently 
be  kept  from  sinning ;  and,  therefore,  that  the  only  question 
respecting  the  human  race  was,  as  has  been  already  stated,  not 
how  could  the  race  be  kept  from  siuning,  but  how  be  saved 
after  they  have  sinned. 

Of  course  this  is  not  the  usual  statement  of  the  doctrine  ; 
but  still  it  involves  the  trial  of  the  human  race  in  Adam  in  a 
certain  sense  ;  and  just  so  far  as  it  does,  it  involves  the  funda¬ 
mental  principle  of  Federal  Headship. 

The  doctrine  of  Hereditary  Depravity  fails,  in  several  re¬ 
spects,  of  being  satisfactory. 


181 


1.  History  of  the  Doctrine. 

p 

The  ancient  doctrine,  as  taught  by  Augustine  in  the  fifth  cen¬ 
tury,  was  the  result  of  mere  human  speculation.  It  was  assumed 
that  souls,  like  bodies,  are  propagated  from  parent  to  child.* 

Hence,  that  the  whole  human  race  were  created  when  Adam 
was,  the  successive  birth  of  the  individuals  being  only  the  unfold¬ 
ing  of  the  race  ;  so  that  we,  of  this  generation,  were  created  six 
thousand  years  before  ’we  were  born.  Hence  that  we,  each  one  of 
us,  ate,  with  him,  the  forbidden  fruit  in  Eden;  and  so  all  the  hu¬ 
man  race,  in  the  language  of  the  catechism,  “  sinned  in  him  and 
fell  with  him  in  his  first  transgression.”  “  Therefore,”  Augustine 
says,  “all  sinned  in  Adam;  the  human  race  were  in  the  loins  of 
Adam.”  Calvin  held  the  same  view.  He  says:  “  We  all  sinned 
before  we -were  born.”  This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Assembly’s 
catechism,  and  which  was  finally  crystallized  in  New  England  in 
that  familiar  couplet  of  the  primer, — 

“  In  Adam’s  fall 
We  sinned  all.” 

This  is  the  ancient  and  proper  doctrine  of  “  original  sin.”| 

This  made  two  kinds  of  sin — one  committed  before  we  were 
born,  and  the  other  after.  The  first  was  called  “  original,”  the 
second  “  actual.”  The  first  made  men  sinners  “  by  nature,”  the 
second  “  by  practice.” 

But  the  doctrine  has  been  greatly  modified  by  theologians 
subsequently;  so  that  there  have  been  as  many  as  six  statements 
of  it  among  Calvinistic  theologians  which  differ  radically  from 
each  other. 

Pres.  Edwards  differs  from  Augustine  and  Calvin  in  that  he 
rejects  the  propagation  of  souls  entirely,  but  holds  to  a  “divinely 

*  Augustine,  however,  thought  he  found  a  scriptural  warrant  for 
this  doctrine  in  Rom.  5:12 — “  death  passed  upon  all  men  for  that  all  have 
sinned”  ;  the  English  translation  “  for  that,”  being  rendered  in  the  Latin 
Vulgate  by  “in  quo” — in  idiom.  The  expression  in  the  original  Greek, 
however,  admits  of  three  different  translations — in  whom,  for  that,  and 
unto  which.  Doddridge  prefers  the  latter — unto  which  death  all  have 
sinned.” 

The  doctrine  of  Traducianism,  or  the  propagation  of  souls,  has  no 
scriptural  foundation  unless  it  be  this  translation  of  the  Vulgate — in 
whom ;  while  two  other  translations  ‘are  equally  true  to  the  original. 
Turretin  regards  the  propagation  of  souls  as  heresy. 

.  f  Out  of  this  purely  philosophical  assumption  grew  the  horrible  dog¬ 
ma  of  infant  damnation,  and  which,  owing  mainly  to  the  authority  of 
St.  Augustine,  wras  adopted  by  the  entire  mediaeval  church;  the  logical 
process  being  that  as  every  infant  had  committed  the  sin  of  eating  the 
forbidden  fruit  in  Eden,  and  as  there  had  been  no  opportunity  for  repent¬ 
ance,  of  course,  his  perdition  must  be  the  only  possible  result. 


182 


constituted  union  between  Adam  and  his  posterity,  by  which  his 
sin  becomes  theirs.”  According  to  Augustine,  we  are  guilty  at 
birth  because  we  ate  the  forbidden  fruit.  According  to  Edwards, 
because  God  determined  that  Adam’s  sin  should  be  ours. 

The  Princeton  Divines  reject  all  co-existence  with  Adam, 
or  any  real  guilt  on  account  of  his  sin;  but  hold  still  that  God 
regards  and  treats  us  as  if  we  were  guilty.  Says  Dr.  Hodge : 
“  Adam’s  act  was  regarded  as  our  act ;  ”  he  being,  in  this  view, 
a  kind  of  representative  of  the  human  race,  and  related  to  us  by 
a  sort  of  “ federal  headship.”  Here  is  another  change.  Edwards 
and  Calvin  both  held  that  we  were  guilty  of  Adam’s  sin,  though 
in  different  ways  ;  but  Princeton,  only  that  we  are  treated  as  if 
we  were.  This  theory  is  called  Imputation;  and  which  Stuart, 
with  a  kind  of  grim  facetiousness,  characterizes  as  “  fictitious 
guilt,  but  veritable  damnation.” 

Many  New  England  theologians  have  made  another  change, 
and  teach,  not  that  we  are  guilty  of  Adam’s  sin  in  any  sense;  but 
only  that  we  inherit  from  him  a  sinful  disposition;  ( vide  Wood’s 
Essay.) 

Others  make  another  change,  and  say  that  the  disposition  is 
not  really  sinful ,  but  only  that  we  are  depraved,  corrupt,  disor¬ 
dered  at  birth  from  our  connection  with  Adam,  and  on  this  ac¬ 
count  grow  up  to  be  sinful.  This  is  at  present  the  prevailing  be¬ 
lief  of  the  evangelical  bodies;  though  now  seldom  advanced  out¬ 
side  of  the  theological  lecture  room. 

At  this  point,  too,  there  is  a  difference  ;  some,  like  Stuart, 
holding  that  the  stream  of  moral  pollution,  originating  in  Adam, 
has  flowed  to  the  human  race  through  the  mental  channel;  others 
like  Pres.  Appleton,  that  its  channel  has  been  through  the  phys¬ 
ical  embodiment. 

Dr.  Dwight  says  he  is  unable  to  explain  it,  and  confesses  he 
has  seen  “no  explanation  which  did  not  leave  the  difficulties  as 
great,  and  for  aught  I  know  as  numerous  as  they  were  before.” 

Dr.  Taylor  narrows  down  the  doctrine  to  this — “  I  take  onlv 
this  general  position  as  that,  and  that  only  which  the  Scriptures 
authorize — that  the  sinfulness  of  mankind  is  in  consequence  of 
Adam’s  sin.” 

Dr.  Edward  Beecher  sweeps  even  this  away,  and  declares 
that  “  the  doctrine  that  our  depraved  natures,  or  our  sinful  con 
duct,  have  been  caused  or  occasioned  by  the  sin  of  Adam,  is  not 
asserted  in  any  part  of  the  Word  of  God.”  Also  he  declares  that 
“  all  attempts  to  explain  the  connection  between  the  sin  of  Adam 
and  the  ruin  of  his  posterity,  have  been  so  unsatisfactory,  as  to 
create  a  violent  presumption  that  the  idea  is,  in  itself,  incapable 
of  vindication  or  defence.”  And  Pres.  Fairchild,  in  the  Advance 
of  Sept.  16,  1869,  makes  this  very  significant  statement : — “  The 


183 

doctrine  of  the  Fall,  in  its  relation  to  human  depravity,  is  confess¬ 
edly  an  open  question .” 

And  perhaps  among  all  our  modern  theologians,  there  is  not 
a  more  conservative  man  or  a  more  close  and  careful  thinker  than 
Pres.  Fairchild. 

Such  are  the  views  of  some  of  the  leading  Calvinistic  theolo¬ 
gians.  Let  us  notice  the  position  of  a  few  of  the  more  distin¬ 
guished  of  the  Arminian  divines. 

Says  Arminius,  “  All  those  will  be  saved  who  have  not  them¬ 
selves  committed  actual  transgressions ;”  thus  utterly  rejecting 
the  doctrine  that  infants  would  be  lost. 

Wesley,  in  the  early  part  of  his  life,  had  embraced  the  Augus- 
tinian  theology;  for  he  says — “By  the  sin  of  tbe  first  Adam — we 
all  became  children  of  wrath.”  Again,  “We  were  all  born  with  a 
sinful,  devilish  nature.”  But  in  subsequent  years  he  appears  to 
have  entirely  changed  his  theological  position;  for  he  says  in  his 
later  writings — “  Nothing  is  sin,  strictly  speaking,  but  a  voluntary 
transgression  of  a  known  law  of  God.” 

Notice  here  the  word  known;  plainly  implying  that  there  was 
no  sin,  nor  the  possibility  of  it,  until  the  age  of  intelligent  respon¬ 
sibility  was  reached. 

Evidently,  in  his  estimation,  it  was  not  necessarily  heresy  for 
a  man  to  change  his  theological  opinions  on  this  point. 

It  may  not  be  heresy  to  advance  a  step  further. 

Says  Watson — “Little  children,  until  actual  sin,  remain  heirs 
of  eternal  glory” — remain  thus ;  that  is  thev  are  heirs  of  glory 
from  the  mere  fact  of  their  creation  by  God,  and  remain  so  till 
actual  sin. 

Says  Dr.  Adam  Clark — “Christ  loves  little  children,  be¬ 
cause  he  loves  simplicity  and  innocence .” 

Says  Limborch — “  Infants  have  a  certain  inclination  to  sin 
which  they  derive,  not  from  Adam,  but  from  their  next  immedi¬ 
ate  parents.”  In  this  view  he  would  apparently  make  the  de¬ 
pravity  of  men  to  run  back  to  Adam  for  its  prime  origin,  while 
he  would  still  reject  the  theory  of  Augustine  that  the  entire  race 
existed  in  Adam. 

Fletcher  probably  phrases  the  prevalent  belief  correctly 
when  he  says  :  “  As  Adam  brought  a  general  condemnation, 

and  a  universal  seed  of  death  upon  all,  so  Christ  brings  upon 
them  a  general  justification  and  a  universal  seed  of  life.”  To 
this  we  add,  that  if  these  results  of  God’s  visitation  upon  men 
for  the  sin  of  Adam,  as  Fletcher  represents  them,  are  not  to  be 
regarded  as  a  calamity ,  there  can  be  no  objection  to  the  above 
statement;  but,  according  to  the  general  belief,  they  are. 
Stuart’s  view,  as  he  distinctly  states  it — and  which  is  only  im¬ 
plied  in  the  above  quotation  from  Fletcher — is  that  the  connec¬ 
tion  with  Adam  is  a  calamity;  and  that  the  atonement  of  Christ 


184 


comes  in  as  a  “  Compensation ,”  to  make  up  for  these  previously 
inflicted  evils  and  calamities — this  “  general  condemnation.” 
But  if  so,  then  God  was  under  obligation  to  provide  the  atone¬ 
ment;  and  how  then  is  it  a  purely  gracious  dispensation — a 
dorea  en  kariti ,  as  the  Apostle  .terms  it,  and  which  God  was 
under  no  obligation  to  men  to  bestow. 

2.  Scripture  Argument. 

The  way  sin  was  proved  by  the  old  divines  to  have  de¬ 
scended  from  Adam  was  by  making  the  death  spoken  of  in 
Romans  Y.  include  death  spiritual  as  Avell  as  temporal. 

The  refutation  of  this  exegesis  by  Dr.  Beecher  in  his  Con¬ 
flict  of  Ages,  is  exhaustive  and  unanswerable.  He  shows  that 
this  interpretation  is  not  found  in  the  early  fathers;  was  not 
given  to  the  passage  till  the  fourth  century;  was  never  adopted 
by  the  Greek  church  at  all ;  and  moreover  is  entirely  at  variance 
with  the  design  and  scope  of  the  argument. 

But,  if  the  doctrine  of  sin  derived  from  Adam  is  not  taught 
in  Romans  Y.  then  it  is  not  a  doctrine  of  the  Bible;  for  as  Dr. 
Beecher  says:  “If  these  things  [depravity  and  disorder  at 
birth]  are  not  asserted  in  this  })assage  to  have  been  caused  by  the 
sin  of  Adam,  then  plainly  they  are  not  asserted  to  have  been 
caused  by  it  at  all  in  any  part  of  the  Word  of  God;  for  there  is 
no  other  passage  of  Scripture,  in  which  it  can  even  be  pretended 
with  any  show  of  probability  whatever  that  these  things  are 
asserted.”  * 

*  Although  endorsing  thus  fully  the  reasoning  of  Dr.  Beecher  upon 
the  connection  of  the  human  race  with  Adam,  and  feeling  that  he  has 
done  great  service  to  the  church  in  refuting  the  mischievous  dogma  of 
inherited  depravity,  we  do  not  yet  see  sufficient  reason  to  accept  iiis 
hypothesis  of  Pre-existence.  His  argument  may  be  briefly  stated  as 
follows : 

1.  Men  are  in  a  sinful,  depraved  or  disordered  condition  at  birth. 

2.  No  beings  can  be  responsible  for  it  but  God  and  ourselves. 

3.  “  The  principles  of  honor  and  right”  forbid  us  to  ascribe  it  to 
God.  Therefore, 

4.  The  responsibility  must  come  on  us ;  and  how  can  this  be  unless 
through  a  forfeiture  at  birth  by  sin  committed  by  us  in  a  previous  state 
of  existence  ? 

If  the  first  of  these  positions  be  granted,  we  regard  the  reasoning  as 
unanswerable;  but  this  is  made  to  rest  solely  on  the  authority  of  the  past. 
He  himself  makes  no  attempt  to  sustain  it  except  by  numerous  quota¬ 
tions  from  ancient  and  modern  writers,  and  from  confessions  of  faith; 
none  of  which  prove  moral  disorder  and  birth,  but  are  all,  without  ex¬ 
ception,  mere  philosophical  assumptions  in  order  to  account  for  the  cer¬ 
tainty  and  universality  of  human  sinfulness. 

But  if  the  hypothesis  be  accepted  that  the  occasion  of  sin  in  men 
lies  in  the  necessary  nature  of  free  agency,  and  is  inseparable  from  it, 
then  the  certainty  and  universality  of  human  sinfulness  are  accounted 
for  without  the  assumption  of  depravity  or  even  disorder  at  birth  ;  and 
the  hypothesis  of  sin  committed  in  a  pre-existent  state  becomes  unneces¬ 
sary. 


185 


2.  Exegesis  of  Romans  5 :  12-19. 

The  only  argument  of  any  weight  for  making  the  death 
spoken  of  in  this  passage  include  spiritual  as  well  as  temporal 
death,  is  that  it  stands  in  contrast  with  the  word  life ;  and  as  the 
latter  evidently  means  spiritual  and  eternal  life,  therefore  the 
former  must  mean  spiritual  and  eternal  death.  Answer : 

This  assumes  that  Paul,  in  comparing  the  respective  works 
of  Adam  and  of  Christ,  is  intending  to  make  a  formal  comparison 
— to  run  a  careful  and  exact  parallel  between  the  two,  so  that 
what  is  said  of  the  work  of  the  one,  shall  find  an  exact  counter¬ 
part  in  the  work  of  the  other.  But  this  assumption  is  utterly 
without  foundation. 

Now  let  a  view  be  taken  diametrically  the  opposite  of  this. 
Let  it  be  assumed  with  equal,  and  even  superior  probability,  that 
the  mind  of  the  Apostle,  in  its  rapid  and  intense  workings,  dis¬ 
cerning  a  certain  correspondence  between  the  works  of  Adam  and 
of  Christ,  so  that  one  might  properly  be  considered  in  some  re¬ 
spects,  a  type  ( tup  os )  of  the  other,  is  catching  merely  at  those 
points  of  comparison  in  which  the  two  illustrate  each  other  more 
or  less  perfectly,  with  no  thought  of  an  exact  correspondence — a 
rigid  and  formal  comparison,  and  the  entire  argument  falls  to  the 
ground.  Certainly  this  is  his  manner  of  writing  elsewhere.  Wit¬ 
ness  the  corresponding  passage  in  1  Cor.  15  :  45-49 — the  only 
other  passage  in  which  Adam  and  Christ  are  compared. 

The  first  Adam  was  made  “  a  living  soul,”  the  last  Adam  was 
“  a  quickening  spirit.” 

The  first  was  “natural,”  the  last  “  spiritual.” 

The  first  was  “earthly,”  the  last  “heavenly.” 

Those  who  are  earthly  are  like  Adam,  those  who  are  heaven¬ 
ly  are  like  Christ. 

Now,  to  assume  an  exact  correspondence  here  would  be  ab¬ 
surd. 

For  example — Assume  that  the  expression  “  a  living  soul  ” 
was  intended  precisely  to  correspond  with  “a quickening  spirit,” 
and  then  undertake  to  ascertain  the  exact  meaning  of  the  one 
from  the  other,  and  the  absurdity  becomes  apparent.  No,  in  both 
passages,  the  Apostle  is  evidently  catching  only  at  points  of  re¬ 
semblance  more  or  less  obvious,  and  thus  the  word  death  in  Rom. 
5,  need  not  be  pressed  to  an  exact  fulness  of  meaning  with  the 
word  life,  and  allows ,  at  least,  of  limitation  to  temporal  death. 

Verse  19,  “  were  made  sinners .” 

This  verse,  as  it  stands  in  our  translation,  teaches  Universal- 
ism  out  and  out ;  for  the  unqualified  statement  is  that  as  all 
“  were  made  sinners  ”  by  Adam,  so  all  shall  be  made  righteous 
by  Christ ;  and  if  “  were  made  ”  really  means  what  the  words  im- 


-  186 


ply,  that  all  men  actually  become  sinners  through  Adam,  then  all 
men  must  actually  become  righteous  through  Christ,  and  Univer- 
salism  is  the  logical  result. 

Now  the  word  translated  “  were  made  ”  occurs  in  the  New 
Testament  twe7ity  one  times.  In  all  the  other  places  where  Paul 
uses  it,  it  means  to  ordain  or  appoint  as  a  ruler,  conductor,  over¬ 
seer,  judge,  elder  or  priest,  but  in  no  other  one  of  them  does  it 
mean  “  were  made,”  as  here  translated.  And  in  neither  of  the 
other  three  places  where  it  occurs,  does  it  necessarily  need  the 
translation  “  were  made.”  The  exact  meaning  of  the  word  is  to 
put,  place  or  lay  down,  that  is,  to  put  in  a  position;  and  the  mean¬ 
ing  of  the  statement  in  V.  19,  which  seems  the  most  natural,  is 
this — That  as  all  are  made  subject  to  temporal  death  for  Adam’s 
sin.  aud  are  so  far  put  in  the  position  of  sinners  for  his  sake,  so 
by  the  obedience  of  Christ,  all  are  put  in  the  position  of  the  right¬ 
eous,  so  far  as  to  receive  with  them  the  benefits  of  Christ’s  re¬ 
demption — the  offer  of  pardon,  and  the  blessings  of  probation.* 

A  condensed  summary  of  the  entire  passage  is  as  follows  : — 

First — The  Apostle  says  (v.  12)  that  by  one  man  sin  entered 
into  the  world,  and  death  entered  by  it,  and  so  death  passed  upon 
all  men;  that  is,  The  condemning  sentence  of  temporal  death  was 
passed  upon  the  entire  race  for  Adam’s  sin.  “  In  Adam  all  die.” 
(1  Cor.  15:22.)  “  By  one  man’s  offence  death  reigned  ”  That  is, 

the  mortality  which  Adam  incurred  by  sinning,  was  transmitted, 
by  God’s  arrangement,  to  the  entire  race. 

Secondly — He  represents  the  work  of  Christ  as  equalling  and 
even  in  some  respects  surpassing  in  its  effects  the  results  of 
Adam’s  sin  ;  for  example — 

V.  15.  By  one,  death  comes  to  all  /  by  one,  grace  abounds 
to  all. 

V.  16.  “  The  judgment  ” — the  condemning  sentence  of  tem¬ 

poral  death — follows  “  one”  offence;  the  “free  gift”  follows 
“  many.” 

y.  17.  By  one  sinner,  and  he  a  mere  man,  death  temporal 
reigns ;  much  more  by  the  Infinite  Savior,  the  elect  shall  reign  in 
life  eternal. 

*  The  paraphrase  of  Knight  on  this  passage  is  as  follows — “  For  as 
by  one  man’s  (Adam’s)  offence,  the  multitudes  who  have  peopled  this 
world,  have  been  placed  in  the  position  of  sinners  by  being  handed  over 
to  death,  so  by  the  obedience  of  One,  even  Christ,  shall  the  same  multi¬ 
tudes  be  placed  in  the  position  of  righteous  persons,  so  far  as  to  be  raised 
from  death:”  limiting  thus,  as  it  would  appear,  the  declared  consequen¬ 
ces  of  Christ’s  death,  to  the  resurrection  of  all  men  from  the  dead. 

Perhaps  the  more  extended  view  of  Stuart  is  preferable.  He  pre¬ 
sents  the  consequences  of  Christ’s  death  to  the  entire  race  thus — “A 
state  of  renewed  and  peculiar  probation,  attended  with  many  privileges 
and  blessings,  with  the  proffer  of  eternal  life  and  glory  procured  for  our 
guilty  race  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.”  This  certainly  is  a  fair  and  con¬ 
sistent  interpretation,  and  meets  all  that  the  passage  necessarily  requires. 


187 


V.  18.  By  “one  offence”  (Greek)  all  come  under  a  con¬ 
demning  sentence  of  temporal  death  ;  by  “  one  righteousness  ” 
(Greek)  all  come  under  a  provision  for  justification  unto  life. 

Y.  19.  As  therefore,  by  the  disobedience  of  one,  all  are  put 
in  the  position  of  “sinners”  (by  thus  suffering  temporal  death  for 
his  sin)  so  by  the  obedience  of  One,  all  are  put  in  the  position  of 
the  “righteous,”  (by  the  blessings  they  enjoy  in  common  with 
them.) 

Y.  20.  This  verse  should  be  especially  noticed  in  its  bear¬ 
ing  on  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity.  In  v.  1 2,  sin  en¬ 
tered  (eise  It  he)  and  death  entered  by  it.  Now  v.  20,  the  law 
( pareiselthen )  entered  in  addition  so  that  (as  a  consequence)  the 
fall  (paraptoma)  “abounded” — filled  up,  extended,  filled  up  the 
world;  but  grace  met  even  this  additional  exigency,  so  that 
where  even  “sin  abounded,  grace  superabounded.” 

[Note.  If  we  are  to  believe  that  the  fall  extended  beyond 
Adam — “  abounded  ” — embraced  the  race,  for  the  reason  that  his 
descendants  were  connected  with  him ,  then  here  in  this  20th 
verse,  if  anywhere,  we  should  expect  that  doctrine  would  be 
stated.  But  that  verse  says  nothing  about  it,  and  only  mentions 
as  the  occasion  of  this  universal  sinfulness,  that  the  law  came  in 
— either  natural  or  revealed  or  both — implying  that  men  now 
become  sinners  just  as  Adam  did,  by  an  intelligent  transgression 
of  it;  no  allusion  being  made  directly  or  indirectly  to  him  as  the 
occasion  of  this  universal  sinfulness.] 

Y.  21.  That  as  sin  hath  reigned  in  or  with  death  temporal 
( e?i  to  thanato)  meaning  perhaps  in  connection  with  it — attended 
by  it — and  commensurate  in  extent  with  it,  so  might  grace  reign 
through  righteousness  unto  life  eternal. 

3.  Argument  from  Reason. 

But,  it  is  asserted  on  the  ground  of  reason,  that  human  sin¬ 
fulness  is  derived  from  Adam.  It  appears ,  it  is  said,  that  the 
child  inherits  the  depraved  constitution  of  the  parent,  and  there¬ 
fore,  that  depravity  is  thus  handed  down  from  parent  to  child, 
and  hence  must  run  back  finally  to  a  depraved  ancestor  for  its 
origin.  Answer: 

The  child  inherits  from  the  parent  four  things  ;  not  always, 
but  generally: 

1.  Physical  peculiarities,  as  of  feature  and  complexion. 

2.  Mental  peculiarities  as  of  strength  or  weakness  or  apti¬ 
tude  for  particular  studies. 

3.  Peculiarities  of  disposition;  willful  and  headstrong- 
parents,  generally  having  similarly  constituted  children. 

4.  Depraved  tastes ,  also,  like  the  appetite  in  the  parent  for 
intoxicating  drink,  or  any  other  vicious  indulgence. 

But  the  primary  occasion  of  sin,  as  we  have  seen,  lies  back 


188 


of  all  these,  in  the  constitutional  nature  of  the  moral  being;  and 
this  occasion  is  only  modified  in  its  external  manifestations  by 
the  parental  connection;  so  that  all  we  know  with  certainty  re¬ 
specting  this  matter  is,  that  parental  peculiarities  are  apt  to  de¬ 
termine  what  particular  form  the  sin  of  the  child  shall  take;  that 
is,  no  matter  who  or  what  the  parents  may  be,  the  child  will  cer¬ 
tainly  sin,  and  the  sin  be  sure  to  take  some  form;  but  the  pecu¬ 
liar'  form  is  very  apt  to  be  determined  by  the  mental  and  phys¬ 
ical  habits  of  either  or  both  parents ;  so  that  the  form  of  sin, 
and  (  not  the  sin  itself \  is  all  that  can  rightly  be  charged  to 
parental  connection  Adam  and  the  angels  both  sinned  without 
any  intervention  of  a  depraved  ancestor  ;  and  a  child,  with  no 
parental  connection,  were  the  thing  possible,  or  placed  in  any 
other  possible  circumstances  at  this  stage  of  the  creation  than 
those  in  which  he  is  placed,  would  undoubtedly  do  the  same.* 

4.  The  Hypothesis  Useless,  Unreasonable  and  Mischievous. 

The  doctrine,  therefore,  that  men  sin  from  a  connection  with 
Adam,  is  taught  neither  by  Reason  nor  Revelation,  and  is  a  mere 
hypothesis  of  human  invention,  to  account  for  the  certainty  and 
universality  of  human  sinfulness.  And  now  regarding  it  as  an 
hypothesis  merely,  it  is  both  useless,  unreasonable  and  mis¬ 
chievous. 

1  It  is  useless.  For  the  sole  value  of  an  hypothesis  lies  in 
its  accounting  for  facts.  Now  we  have  three  facts  or  instances 
of  sin — the  Angels,  Adam  and  ourselves  ;  and  the  hypothesis 
accounts  only  for  our  sin,  leaving  the  other  two  instances  with 
no  explanation  whatever.  And  what  is  an  hypothesis  worth  that 
explains  only  one-third  of  the  facts  ! 

2.  It  is  unreasonable.  Much  confusion  has  arisen  in  theo¬ 
logical  discussion  from  not  properly  discriminating  between 

*  It  will  be  obvious  to  the  theological  student  that  we  have  adopted, 
as  a  philosophical  basis,  the  doctrine  of  Creationism,  rather  than  that  of' 
Traducianism;  for  although,  as  Prof.  Shedd  observes,  “the  doctrine  of 
Traducianism  is  unquestionably  more  accordant  with  that  of  Original 
Siu,  than  that  of  Creationism,”  still  we  are  not  able  to  see  that,  as  a 
philosophical  hypothesis,  it  explains  and  harmonizes  as  many  of  the 
facts  of  Reason  and  Revelation  as  that  of  Creationism.  Indeed,  as  an 
hypothesis,  it  applies  only  to  the  human  race:  while  that  of  Creationism* 
admits  of  application  to  this  world,  and  to  all  worlds  forever. 

Whether,  however,  the  theory  of  Creationism  or  Traducianism  be 
adopted  makes  no  difference  with  the  point  in  question.  For  suppose 
souls  are  propagated,  the  only  necessary  inference  is  that  Adam  begat  a 
being  like  himself — a  free,  moral  agent,  and  as  such  having  in  him  the 
same  occasion  of  sin  that  Adam  himself  had,  and  that  the  angels  had : 
and  that  he  sinned,  not  because  derived  from  a  depraved  ancestor,  but 
simply  and  solely  because  he  was  a  moral  being,  and  sinned  for  the  same 
reason  that  Adam  and  the  angels  did. 


189 


human  nature  and  human  character.  Men  often  say  that  human 
nature  is  bad  when  they  only  mean  human  character . 

Now,  properly  speaking,  human  nature  is  what  God  makes 
men  to  be  by  virtue  of  their  creation.  Human  character  is  what 
men  make  themselves  to  be  by  their  own  acting. 

Human  nature,  God  makes  “  in  his  own  image .”  (James 
3:9.)  Human  character,  men  make  after  another  pattern  ;  as 
our  Saviour  said,  “  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  Devil,  and  the  lusts 
of  your  father,  ye  will  do.”  (John  8:  44.) 

Human  nature  therefore,  or  what  men  are  at  birth,  is  God¬ 
like  ;  human  character ,  or  what  men  make  themselves  after¬ 
wards,  is  devilish. 

(1.)  Human  nature.  This  is  the  nature  God  gives  men. 
All  men  are  made  “after  the  similitude  of  God.”  (James  3  :  9.) 
By  this  is  meant  that  they  have  powers  of  thinking,  feeling  and 
acting — an  intellect  to  know  and  understand  God,  sensibilities 
wherewith  to  love  him,  and  a  will  to  choose  his  service.  This  is 
God’s  image  in  the  soul. 

(2.)  Human  character.  Some  hold  that  men  are  born  sin¬ 
ful — that  they  inherit  a  positively  sinful  nature.  This  is  so 
absurd  that  nothing  can  be  more  so.  For  in  that  case  a  man 
cannot  avoid  being  a  sinner  ;  and,  if  he  cannot  avoid  it,  then  he 
is  not  to  blame  for  it ;  and  if  he  is  not  to  blame  for  it,  then  he  is 
innocent ;  and  we  have  the  manifest  absurdity  of  a  sinful  inno¬ 
cence,  or  an  innocent  sinfulness.  With  the  same  propriety 
might  we  speak  of  an  honest  thief,  or  a  truthful  liar. 

Also  “  sin  is  the  transgression  of  the  law ;  ”  and  how  can  a 
being  transgress  law,  when  too  immature  and  undeveloped  even 
to  know  what  law  is  ? 

Others,  therefore,  would  not  say  that  the  infant  was  born 
sinful ,  but  only  that  he  inherits  a  depraved  nature  because  he 
will  certainly  sin  by  and  by.  And  such  often  speak  of  the  in¬ 
fant  in  terms  of  reprobation  ;  calling  him  “  a  little  viper,”  for 
example,  only  undeveloped  as  yet.  This  is  wicked.  It  is  tra¬ 
ducing  God’s  image.  It  was  certain  that  Adam  would  eventually 
sin,  but  think  of  God  as  calling  him  a  viper — a  moral  monster 
during  his  innocence  because  he  would  sin  at  some  future 
time  !  * 

*  True,  there  is  in  every  man  a  ground  of  certainty  in  his  love  of 
conscious  freedom,  that  he  will  sin  as  soon  as  he  reaches  the  point  of  in¬ 
telligent  responsibility,  and  feels  the  restraints  of  law;  but  until  he  has 
felt  those  restraints  and  resisted  them,  there  is  no  sin  in  him  nor  the 
possibility  of  sin.  The  infant,  therefore,  in  character,  is  neither  sinful 
nor  holy — not  holy  because  he  lias  obeyed  no  law,  and  not  sinful  because 
he  has  transgressed  none.  He  is  simply  innocent,  and  as  such  is  spoken 
of  by  our  Saviour.  “  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.”  (Matt.  19  : 14.) 

But  as  soon  as  he  meets  the  restraint  of  law,  he  will  refuse  to  submit 
to  it.  Every  one  does.  As  soon  as  he  knows  enough  to  sin,  he  will  sin. 


190 


There  is  no  reason  for  calling  the  infant  depraved  because 
he  vrill  sin,  any  more  than  there  would  have  been  for  calling 
Adam  depraved  before  his  fall,  because  he  would  sin  eventually. 
Such  statements  respecting  the  infant  are  unreasonable.  There 
is  no  depravity  in  any  being  but  such  as  results  from  responsible 
sinning ;  and  no  other  sinful  character  is  possible  but  such  as 
results  from  an  intelligent  and  willful  ti  ansgression  of  the  law  of 
God ;  and  the  idea  of  inherited  sinfulness,  or  even  inherited  de¬ 
pravity,  as  the  expression  is  generally  understood,  violates  our 
necessary  ideas  of  moral  and  responsible  action.* 

3.  It  is  mischievous. 

First — It  traces  our  sin  to  an  arrangement  of  God  ap¬ 
parently  designed  to  secure  it,  and  confuses  all  our  ideas  of  his 
holiness  and  uprightness.  Indeed  the  very  idea  that  God  should, 
by  any  of  these  arrangements,  of  which  he  is  the  sole  and  re¬ 
sponsible  author,  accumulate  obstacles  in  the  way  of  submission 
to  himself,  is  monstrous,  and  would  convict  him  of  being  a 
worse  tempter  to  human  sinfulness  than  the  Adversary  himself. 
For  the  Devil  did  not  create  the  laws  of  propagation,  nor  can 


Even  his  first  truly  moral  act  will  ever  be  a  sinful  one.  He  will  resist 
the  Almighty  at  the  very  outset,  and  “  will  not  have  him  to  reign  over 
him.”  And  to  this  there  are  no  exceptions  in  this  world.  “  All  have 
sinned  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God.”  (Rom.  3  :  23.) 

And  then  this  sinful  act  of  rebellion  becomes  afterwards  a  sinful 
state — becomes  “  the  carnal  mind,  enmity  against  God  and  not  subject  to 
his  law;”  (Rom.  8:7.)  and  while  this  state  continues,  nothing  that  he 
can  do  will  be  acceptable  to  him.  The  moral  character  of  every  act 
will  be  determined,  in  God’s  estimation,  by  the  ruling,  and  rebellious 
principle  of  his  heart.  From  the  time  he  commences  sinning,  until 
repentance  and  conversion  take  place,  he  is  “  totally  depraved,  ”  or,  as 
that  expression  has  been  caricatured  to  mean,  as  bad  as  he  can  be,  which 
is  not  true,  it  may  be  better  to  call  him  entirely  sinful.  His  heart  is 
“  full  of  evil,”  (Ecc.  9:3),  and  not  until  conversion  does  he  do  one  right 
and  holy  act.  He  is  not  perhaps  as  bad  as  he  can  be,  for  while  his  heart 
is  “  full  of  evil  ” — full  of  ingratitude  to  God  and  forgetfulness  of  him,  it 
might  be  full  of  profanity  and  blasphemy;  and  that  would  make  him  a 
worse  man  than  if  he  were  merely  ungrateful  and  disobedient. 


*  In  this  view  the  phraseology  of  Prof.  Shedd  in  the  caption  of  the 
article  “  sin  a  nature  and  that  nature  guilt,”  seems  not  the  best.  Nor 
does  the  passage  referred  to  (Eph.  2  :3)  appear  necessarily  to  sustain  it; 
since  the  expression  en  phusei  may  be  properly  rendered  adverbially, 
making  the  entire  passage  read  thus:  “  And  were  naturally  (that  is,  in 
our  natural,  unconverted  state)  children  of  wrath,  &c.,”  without  mean¬ 
ing  at  all  to  imply  that  the  nature  itself  was  sinful.  Properly  speaking 
nature  is  never  sinful,  but  only  character,  principle,  choice;  and  a  better 
statement  would  be — sin  an  intelligent  act,  and  that  act  a  “  transgres¬ 
sion  of  the  law,”  (I  John  3  :4.)  The  scripture  statement  cannot  be  im¬ 
proved. 


191 


he  mold  the  essential  elements  of  character.  As  we  are  born 
into  this  world,  so  God  made  us  to  be  born ;  and  for  all  that  is 
in  us  at  birth ,  he  alone  is  responsible. 

Secondly — It  impugns  the  benevolence  of  God.  The  very 
first  question  of  theology  is,  “  who  made  you  ?”  “  Answer, 

“  God  ”  And  he  made  me  as  I  am,  so  that  everything  in  me  at 
birth  is  his  work ,  even  all  the  consequences  of  parental  sinful¬ 
ness.  This  he  claims.  “  I  visit  the  iniquities  of  the  parents 
upon  .he  children.”  Therefore  for  all  that  is  in  us  at  birth,  God 
alone  is  responsible  ;  and  if  depravity  be  inherited,  then  is  he 
its  responsible  author ;  and  how  could  such  an  arrangement  be 
reconciled  with  infinite  and  perfect  benevolence  ?  Every  Chris¬ 
tian  shrinks  from  saying  that  Gjd  is  the  responsible  author  of 
depravity . 

Thirdly — It  hinders  the  Spirit’s  work  of  conviction  of  sin. 
If  men  under  conviction  of  sin  are  taught  that  they  are  born  with 
a  depravity,  or  tendency  to  sin,  or  hindrances  in  themselves  to 
right  living  and  acting  of  which  God  is  the  responsible  author, 
the  very  next  thought  is  that  they  are  not  entirely  to  blame  for 
their  sinful  conduct.  They  must  be,  to  some  extent,  excusable. 
And  the  writer  has  known  lamentable  instances  where  conviction 
of  sin  has  been  thus  stifled.  Is  it  said  in  reply  that  powerful  re¬ 
vivals  of  religion  have  occured  under  such  preaching  ?  Granted, 
but  only  in  spite  of  it,  and  through  the  influence  of  other  bible 
truth  which  the  Spirit  could  use.  Revivals  have  increased  in 
number  and  in  power  since  such  doctrines  have  been  omitted  in 
preaching. 

Fourthly — It  embarrasses  the  doctrine  of  the  true  humanity 
of  Christ.  The  scriptures  teach  that  Christ  was  “  made  in  all 
things ”  like  us  ;  and  if  we  inherit  depravity  at  birth,  then  he  did  ; 
and  we  never  say  that  Christ  inherited  depravity . 

Fifthly — It  has  a  calamitous  bearing  upon  the  doctrine  of 
future  punishment.  It  is  believed  that  the  wave  of  Universalism 
that  is  now  sweeping  over  the  Orthodox  Churches,  and  threaten¬ 
ing  to  overwhelm  the  entire  system  of  evangelical  faith,  is  due, 
to  a  very  great  extent,  to  the  general  belief  in  this  doctrine  of 
hereditary  depravity. 

To  hold  and  teach  in  the  first  place  that  God  has  connected 
the  hum  in  race  with  a  depraved  ancestor,  and  that  this  connection 
is  the  occasion  of  human  sinfulness — even  more  that  by  virtue  of 
this  connection  he  has  poured  one  stream  of  moral  pollution  down 
through  the  entire  race,  so  that  on  account  of  it  everv  member 
of  the  human  family  is  born  depraved;  and  then,  in  the  very  next 
breath,  that  he  damns  men  eternally  for  being  sinners — (and  this 
is  precisely  the  shape  in  which  the  doctrine  lies  in  the  minds  of 
vast  members  of  professing  Christians,  even,  as  it  is  believed  in 
the  minds  of  a  very  large  majority) — is  so  manifestly  inconsistent 


192 


with  the  dictates  of  benevolence  and  common-sense,  that  men 
have  come  to  feel  quite  generally  that  either  the  doctrine  of 
Hereditary  depravity,  or  the  doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment 
must  be  given  up ;  and  they  have  begun,  all  over  the  land,  to 
give  up  the  latter,  and  to  conclude  that  the  doctrine  of  Endless 
Punishment  is  u  intrinsically  absurd 

The  explanation  of  the  theologians  that  this  hereditary  con¬ 
nection  does  not,  after  all,  destroy  human  freedom  and  responsi¬ 
bility,  and  therefore,  that  men  are  still  in  spite  of  it,  free  and 
responsible,  will  not  be  apprehended  by  the  common  uneducated 
mind.  Notwithstanding  such  abstract  explanations,  the  general 
couviction  will  still  be,  that,  in  such  circumstances,  endless  pun¬ 
ishment  is  unjust,  unreasonable,  and  inconsistent  with  the  divine 
benevolence.  And  it  is  believed,  that  the  main  reason  why  the 
members  of  our  Orthodox  Churches,  are,  to  so  great  an  extent 
rejecting  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  is  their  belief  in 
this  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity. 

But  to  reject  this  is  not  only  to  set  aside  the  plain  teachings 
of  the  bible  but  to  subvert  the  very  foundations  of  the  Orthodox 
faith — taking  away  all  necessity  for  an  infinite  Savior’s  vicarious 
atonement,  and  driving  men  headlong  into  the  rankest  Unita- 
rianism  and  Universalism. 

5.  The  Real  Consequences  of  Adam’s  Sin  to  the  Race. 

1.  Temporal  death.  Adam  having  sinned,  an  immortality 
on  earth  for  him  was  not  desirable  ;  and  hence  the  sentence  of 
temporal,  death  on  him. 

Then,  as  the  race  would  be  a  sinful  one  in  any  possible  cir¬ 
cumstances,  God  determined  so  to  connect  them  with  Adam, 
that  he  should  beget  only  mortal  descendants  like  himself — so 
that  their  mortality  should  be  the  result  of  this  connection  ;  and 
thus,  all  men  died  in  him  ;  immortality  on  earth  for  them ,  as  a 
sinful  race,  being  as  calamitous  an  arrangement  as  for  Adam  ; 
therefore  the  statement,  “  As  in  Adam  all  die  ;  ”  (1  Cor.  15  :  22) 
that  is,  mortality  is  inherited  from  mortal  Adam. 

2.  Physical  labor  and  toil.  “  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face 
shalt  thou  eat  bread.”  (Gen.  3 : 19.)  And  all  know  that  the 
necessity  for  continuous  labor  is  one  of  the  greatest  blessings  to 
a  world  of  sinne?'s. 

3.  Physical  evils  of  various  kinds,  pain,  suffering,  disease 
nd  wretchedness,  coming  on  men,  not  merely  on  account  of 

Adam’s  sin,  but  the  sins  of  their  immediate  parentage,  and  com¬ 
ing  thus  mainly  perhaps,  to  make  men  fear  sin  from  seeing  its 
terrible  consequences  in  those  they  most  love. 

4.  Weakened  intellects.  Stronger  intellects  in  those  who 
will  sin ,  might  only  result  in  greater  sinners. 


5.  A  tendency  to  indulgence  in  the  same  forms  of  sin  of 
which  the  parent  is  guilty.  The  child  will  sin  any  way,  but  the 
particular  form  which  the  sin  shall  take,  may  be  determined,  or 
at  least  modified  by  the  sin  of  the  parent.  This  is  all  that  can 
be  proved  either  from  reason  or  revelation.  And  whatever  this 
hereditary  result  may  be,  there  is  no  reason  for  assuming  it  to 
be  a  calamity,  for  without  this  parental  connection,  it  may  be 
certain  that  the  child  would  sin  in  some  other  and  worse  way — 
sin  perhaps  as  the  Devil  did,  from  the  impulses  of  his  original 
constitution  merely,  and  perhaps  be  thrown  by  it,  as  he  was, 
beyond  the  possibility  of  repentance  and  pardon. 


APPENDIX  B. 


I.  Divine  Limitations  or  what  God  Cannot  Do. 

The  impression  is  not  uncommon  that  God,  on  account  of 
his  Omnipotence,  can  do  anything  and  everything.  The  truth 
is  that  Omnipotence  can  do  anything  coming  within  the  proper 
domain  of  Power ;  while  there  are  many  things  that  do  not 
properly  belong  to  the  region  of  power  at  all,  and  cannot  be 
reached  by  it. 

Some  never  think  of  this,  and  suppose  for  example,  that 
God,  on  account  of  his  Omnipotence,  could  make  a  moral  system 
move  on  in  harmony,  holiness  and  happiness  as  easily  as  he 
could  make  the  sun  to  rise  in  the  heavens  ;  when,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  physical  power,  even  though  it  be  omnipotent,  cannot 
touch  the  moral  universe.  Let  us  notice  the  Divine  Limitations. 

1.  “  God  cannot  lie.”  Such  is  the  declaration  in  Tit.  1  :  2. 
Also  2  Tim.  2  : 13  reads  “  He  cannot  deny  himself  ;  ”  the  mean¬ 
ing  in  both  passages  being  that  he  cannot  act  inconsistently 
with  the  perfections  of  his  own  character.  Not  but  that  he  has 
the  same  physical  power  to  falsify  his  word,  and  neglect  the 
welfare  of  his  kingdom  that  any  other  monarch  has  ;  for  without 
this  he  would  not  be  a  free  moral  agent ;  but 

First  — There  is  no  power  lying  back  of  him  to  compel  to 
such  a  course  of  action. 

Secondly. — There  is  no  motive  whatever  prompting  to  such 
a  course. 

Thirdly. — All  existing  motives  are  prompting  in  an  opposite 
direction. 

Fourthly. — There  is  an  absolute  certainty,  therefore,  that  he 
never  will  thus  falsify  himself.  In  this  sense  “  God  cannot  lie  ” 
— “  cannot  deny  himself,”  nor  act  in  any  way  inconsistently  with 
the  perfections  of  his  own  character. 

2.  God  cannot  act  inconsistently  with  his  own  works.  If 
he  create  a  stone ,  he  binds  himself  to  treat  it  as  a  stone  ever 
after.  Having  created  a  moral  system ,  he  binds  himself  to  gov¬ 
ern  it  by  laws  corresponding  with  the  nature  he  has  given  it. 
As  has  been  already  said,  He  cannot  convert  men  with  crow¬ 
bars,  nor  govern  the  solar  system  by  the  ten  commandments. 

3.  He  cannot  make  a  moral  being  with  any  better  elements 
in  his  original  constitution  than  those  he  has  given  him.  For 
such  a  one  is  made,  as  was  Adam,  “in  his  own  image,”  and  there 
can  be  no  better  pattern.  He  gives  him  an  intellect  to  know  and 
understand ;  whose  distinguishing  glory  and  excellence  is  that 
by  it  he  can  know  and  understand  God. 


195 


He  gives  him  sensibilities  to  feel ;  whose  peculiar  excellence 
is  that  by  them  he  can  kindle  with  emotions  of  gratitude  and 
love,  and  thus  reciprocate  the  affection  of  the  Almighty. 

He  gives  him  a  will  to  choose ;  by  the  voluntary  and  respon¬ 
sible  action  of  which  he  acquires  moral  character ;  and  whose 
loftiest  qualification  is,  that  he  can  choose  God  as  his  Father, 
Friend  and  everlasting  Portion. 

And  this  understanding  to  know,  sensibilities  to  feel,  and 
will  to  choose,  are  what  constitute  God’s  image  in  the  soul.  And 
so,  in  these  fundamental  elements  of  his  nature,  he  is  made  “  in 
God’s  image  ;  ”  and  there  is  no  higher  or  better  pattern  ;  and 
therefore  no  better  kind  of  being  can  be  made  even  by  Omnipo¬ 
tence,  than  a  moral  being. 

4.  God  can  give  him,  as  a  moral  and  responsible  being,  no 
better  Law  than  he  has  given  him.  That  Law  is  comprehended 
in  two  main  particulars — supreme  love  to  God,  and  loving  our 
neighbor  as  ourselves.  And  no  better  law  is  possible  or  con¬ 
ceivable.  If  obeyed  perfectly  it  would  make  the  entire  moral 
universe  as  good  and  blessed  every  way  as  God  himself  could 
make  it. 

5.  He  can  maintain  the  dignity  and  inviolability  of  that 
Law  by  no  higher  sanctions  than  those  with  which  he  has  sus¬ 
tained  it.  When  he  promises  an  eternal  residence  with  himself 
in  glory  as  the  reward  of  obedience,  he  can  promise  no  higher 
reward  ;  and  when  he  threatens  eternal  banishment  from  himself 
as  the  penalty  for  disobedience,  he  can  threaten  no  greater  pen¬ 
alty.  So  that  the  sanctions  with  which  he  sustains  the  dignity 
of  his  law  are  limitless,  and  cannot,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  be 
increased  in  effectiveness. 

6.  He  could  provide  no  better  Savior,  and  no  better  plan 
of  salvation  for  the  sinful  of  this  world,  than  he  has  provided. 
A  Redeemer  was  needed  who  could  “  magnify  the  Law  and 
make  it  honorable,”  even  while  the  sinner  was  allowed  to  go  free 
from  the  claims  of  justice  ;  and  no  one  could  do  this  but  an 
Almighty  Savior.  God’s  only  and  well-beloved  Son  was  the 
only  one  who  could  make  an  adequate  atonement  for  sin  ;  so  that 
no  other  Savior  was  possible  but  he  who  became  “  God  manifest 
in  the  flesh.” 

7.  No  stronger  motive  is  possible  to  win  moral  beings  to 
the  love  and  service  of  God  than  the  motive  with  which  God  is 
drawing  them  by  this  infinite  sacrifice.  It  is  an  infinite  appeal 
to  affection,  and  nothing  can  transcend  it  in  persuasive  power. 
If  this  fails  there  is  no  effort  that  God  can  put  forth  that  will 
have  any  greater  power  and  influence  in  leading  moral  beings  to 
lives  of  holy  obedience.  No  higher  or  more  influential  motive  is 
possible,  even  to  bind  the  whole  moral  universe  to  himself. 

8.  There  is  no  greater  power  or  influence  to  render 


196 


motives  efficacious  than  that  which  God  exerts  in  the  person  of 
his  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  God’s  omnipotent  Spirit  working  out  the 
infinite  unwillingness  of  God  that  men  should  perish — in  its 
nature  the  mightiest,  and  in  its  exertion  the  mightiest,  and 
nothing  can  transcend  it. 

9.  God  cannot  do  the  sinner’s  work  of  repentance  and  faith 
for  him.  It  is  a  work  which  the  sinner  must  do  for  himself,  or 
it  must  remain  forever  undone. 

10.  God  cannot  prevent  sin  in  a  moral  system.  He  may 
prevent  sin  by  the  non  creation  of  the  system,  or  he  may  arrest 
the  spread  of  it  by  the  annihilation  of  the  system.  But  if  the 
system  is  to  be  created  and  perpetuated,  then  the  inclination  of 
moral  beings  to  have  their  own  way,  and  to  resist  the  necessary 
restraints  of  law  and  government,  will,  at  least,  at  the  commence¬ 
ment  of  the  system,  break  over  all  the  motives,  influences  and 
instrumentalities  proper  to  be  used  against  it,  and  result  in 
actual  sin  and  rebellion. 

Perhaps  if  there  were  but  one  moral  being  in  each  world, 
and  he  alone  by  himself,  with  no  revelation  of  God  to  him,  and 
no  law  imposed  upon  him,  he  might  be  kept  from  sinning  ;  and 
such  an  arrangement  might  be  called  a  moral  system,  because 
composed  of  moral  beings  ;  but  it  would  be  useless  to  God,  and 
worthless  in  itself.  Under  the  conditions  of  society ,  and  made 
amenable  to  law  and  government,  moral  beings  will  sin,  at  least 
in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  moral  universe,  notwithstanding  all 
that  God  can  properly  do  to  prevent  it. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing,  we  see  how  utterly  untenable,  and 
even  devoid  of  common-sense,  is  the  position  of  those  who  as¬ 
sume  that  omnipotence  has  no  limitations  ;  as  if  the  Almighty, 
on  account  of  his  omnipotence,  could  shake  a  geometrical  dem¬ 
onstration  with  an  earthquake,  or  govern  the  solar  system  by 
the  ten  commandments. 

II.  Limitations  of  Grace. 

Why  cannot  God  accomplish  more  than  he  does  for  the 
removal  of  sin  by  the  power  of  his  Spirit,  and  even  convert  all 
men  through  the  powerful  provisions  of  Divine  Grace  ?  He 
sways  the  minds  of  men  oftentimes  in  a  most  wonderful  manner 
by  the  influences  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  moving  whole  communities 
at  once,  and  so  awakening  attention  to  the  salvation  of  the  soul 
that  the  question  with  multitudes  is — What  must  I  do  to  be 
saved  ?  This  shows  the  power  and  working  of  an  Omnipotent 
Spirit.  Why  are  not  his  influences  exerted  to  a  greater  extent 
than  they  are  ?  The  Atonement  also  is  infinite  in  its  provisions, 
and  the  resources  of  the  Almighty  in  the  line  of  gracious  exer¬ 
tion,  are  beyond  all  our  computation.  Why  may  not  these  pro- 


197 


visions  of  Divine  Grace,  therefore,  arrest  the  consequences  of 
sin,  and  even  avail  for  the  restoration,  at  length,  of  all  sinners  to 
holiness  ? 

Answer :  Grace  has  its  limitations.  When  God  was  about 
to  abandon  Israel,  and  destroy  them  for  their  perverseness,  he 
says,  “  What  could  have  been  done  more  to  my  vineyard  that  I 
have  not  done  in  it ;  ”  where  the  plain  declaration  is  that  he  had 
done  all  for  them  that  could  be  done ,  and  they  brought  forth  the 
“  wild  grapes  ”  still.  Grace  therefore,  has  its  limitations. 
Whence  do  they  arise  ? 

Not  from  any  willingness  of  God  that  men  should  be  lost ; 
for  he  declares  that  he  is  “not  willing  that  any  should  perish.” 
(2  Pet.  3  :  9.) 

Not  from  any  insufficiency  in  the  Atonement ;  for  Christ  is 
declared  to  be  “  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world;”  (1  Jno.  2:  3);. and  the  declaration  also  is  that  “he 
tasted  death  for  every  man.”  (Heb.  2  :  9.) 

Not  from  any  want  of  cordiality  in  the  invitations  of  the 
Gospel ;  for  they  are  as  full  and  free  and  hearty  as  God  can 
make  them — “  Ho  every  one  that  thirsteth,  come  ye  to  the 
waters.”  (Is  55  : 1.)  “  Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor  and  are 

heavv  laden.”  ( Vfatt.  11 :  28.)  “The  Spirit  and  the  Bride  say 
come.”  (Rev.  22:17.) 

Not  from  any  lack  of  efficiency  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  for  he  is 
an  omnipotent  agent,  and  his  influences  are  given  to  all  men. 
“  He  shall  convict  the  world  of  sin.”  (Jno.  16  :  8.) 

Moreover  if  all  men  would  accept  of  the  provisions  already 
made,  and  yield  to  the  influences  already  exerted,  no  interests 
would  be  jeopardized — “Have  I  any  pleasure  at  all  that  the 
wicked  should  die?”  (Eze.  18  :  23.) 

Where  then  do  the  limitations  of  Grace  come  in  ?  Here  we 
must  tread  lightly,  for  God  has  not  plainly  revealed  them. 

1.  Perhaps  they  may  appertain  to  the  nature  and  necessi¬ 
ties  of  God’s  moral  government  over  the  universe. 

To  illustrate — Ahasuerus  is  the  governor  of  a  hundred  and 
twenty  seven  provinces.  Twenty  seven  of  these  revolt  upon  an 
edict  of  the  government.  He  sends  letters  and  embassadors  en¬ 
treating  them  to  submit  ;  urging  them  not  to  persevere  in  their 
rebellion,  and  insisting  on  their  allegiance.  He  even  sends  his  own 
son  to  negotiate  with  them,  and  to  offer  a  free  pardon  on  condi¬ 
tion  of  repentance  and  obedience.  But  all  refuse  submission. 
Now  suppose  that  by  some  mysterious  power  of  his  own  he  can 
draw  them  all  to  obedience.  Suppose  him  also  endowed  with 
omniscience,  and  to  see  distinctly  that,  should  he  exert  it  to  the 
full  extent,  and  reduce  them  all  in  this  way  to  submission,  then, 
upon  some  future  requisition  of  the  government  demanding  a  sac¬ 
rifice,  there  would  result  a  wider  spread  and  far  more  disastrous 


198 


rebellion  on  this  very  account — his  subjects  presuming  on  his 
goodness,  and  regarding  disobedience  as  safe  ;  and  assuming 
that,  because  on  a  former  occasion  the  government  was  resisted, 
and  no  permanent  evils  followed,  therefore,  a  like  experience  will 
again  follow  rebellion.  Suppose  him  even  to  foresee  that  this 
unlimited  exercise  of  his  goodness  and  mercy  would  be  perverted 
to  the  final  rebellion  of  his  entire  empire.  In  these  circumstances 
he  must  not  restore  all.  Benevolence  will  not  admit  of  it. 

But  suppose  him  in  his  omniscience  to  foresee  that  a  certain 
number  can  be  thus  restored  without  any  such  detriment  to  the 
general  welfare  ;  then  plainly  benevolence  will  admit  that  such  a 
number  be  thus  restored  ;  and  will  also  require,  where  all  are 
equally  undeserving,  that  he  select  such  to  be  the  subjects  of  his 
clemency,  as  in  his  wisdom,  shall  appear  on  the  whole  for  the 
best. 

Now,  for  aught  any  man  can  prove  to  the  contrary,  this  may 
illustrate  the  limitations  of  Divine  Grace  in  the  present  system, 
and  these  limitations,  therefore,  may  lie  in  the  nature  of  moral 
government. 

2.  Or  perhaps  the  limitation  of  grace  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  peculiar  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  have  an  unavoid¬ 
able  tendency  to  weaken  Law.  They  are  apparently  brought  in 
to  supplement  authority  ;  that  is,  when  law  with  its  sanctions  has 
failed  to  produce  obedience,  it  is  an  influence  brought  in  still  to 
secure  that  obedience.  Now  if  a  parent  should  lay  a  command 
upon  his  child,  and  when  obedience  was  refused,  should  under¬ 
take  in  some  way,  to  supplement  his  authority — -to  secure  obe¬ 
dience,  say  by  the  offer  of  a  reward,  he  would  lay  the  foundation 
of  rebellion  in  his  entire  family — at  least,  such  an  act  would  have 
that  tendency.  And  very  possib.y,  the  influences  of  God’s  Spirit, 
in  their  necessary  relations  to  law  and  government,  have  a  simi¬ 
lar  tendency  to  weaken  authority,  and  need  therefore,  to  be  used 
with  the  utmost  carefulness,  and,  as  we  might  say,  sparingly  ; 
and  that  an  unlimited’ exertion  of  them  might  be  fraught  with 
mischief  to  the  entire  universe. 

The  truth  may  therefore  be  not  only  that  God  converts  all 
whom  he  wisely  can — which  is  certainlv  true — but  all  whom  he 
safely  can  ;  and  that  to  convert  even  one  more  soul  than  he  does, 
in  the  way  he  is  obliged  to ,  would  be,  on  the  whole,  injurious  and 
mischievous — very  likely,  somewhere  or  somehow,  in  the  progress 
of  the  universe,  and  when  all  his  past  dealings  have  become  mat¬ 
ters  of  history,  leading  moral  beings  to  presume  upon  his  mercy, 
and  to  dare  the  experiment  of  rebellion  when  otherwise  they 
would  not. 

3.  The  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  also  limited  appa¬ 
rently  by  the  workings  of  Providence.  The  Spirit  works  through 
the  truth — through  means,  motives  and  instrumentalities  denom- 


199 


inated  truth.  His  peculiar  effort  is  apparently  to  render  these 
efficacious ;  and  perhaps  the  efficiency  of  his  operation  on  the 
hearts  of  men,  keeps  exact  pace  with  the  development  of  provi¬ 
dential  dealing.  It  is  “when  God’s  judgments  are  in  the  earth 
that  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  learn  righteousness  (Is.  26  :  9.) 
while  it  is  also  true  that  without  the  Spirit’s  work  in  connection 
with  them,  their  only  influence  would  be  to  harden.  In  the  anti- 
diluvian  period  the  Spirit  strove  with  men  almost  to  no  purpose  ; 
and  but  for  the  Deluge,  the  record  of  the  world  would  very  soon 
have  been  one  of  complete  apostasy.  But  this  wholesale  exter¬ 
mination  of  mankind  for  sin  was  a  warning  voice  against  trifling 
with  the  commands  of  God,  that  could  not  fail  to  be  understood. 
From  that  time  the  drowned  world  became  “  an  example  to  those 
that  after  should  live  ungodly  (2  Peter  2 :  5.)  and  from  that 
time  the  Spirit  had  this  solemn  Divine  testimony  against  sin 
wherewith  to  work  in  human  hearts. 

Then,  as  time  and  distance  were  beginning  to  dull  the  im¬ 
pression  of  this  warning,  came  the  rain  of  fire  and  brimstone 
upon  the  cities  of  the  Plain  for  their  wickedness,  and  they  also 
were  “  set  forth  for  an  example.”  (Jude  7.) 

The  occasion  of  this  remarkable  providence  God  was  pleased 
to  reveal  in  person  and  in  the  most  impressive  manner,  to  his 
servant  Abraham,  the  progenitor  of  his  chosen  people  Israel,  that, 
through  him,  the  meaning  of  it,  in  its  relations  to  sin,  might  be 
fully  understood  ;  to  be  at  length  recorded  in  the  volume  of  In¬ 
spiration,  and  so  enter  as  a  power  into  the  mind  of  the  world. 
What  an  overwhelming  impression  of  the  nature  of  sin  must  that 
awful  morn  have  left  upon  the  mind  of  the  patriarch,  when  hast¬ 
ening  to  the  place  where  the  day  before  he  had  pleaded  with 
God  for  guilty  Sodom,  and  from  which  he  had  beheld  the  vast 
plain,  dotted  with  cities,  and  glowing  in  beauty  and  verdure  “like 
the  garden  of  the  Lord,”  he  now  saw  only  the  smoke  thereof 
going  up  “  as  the  smoke  of  a  furnace,”  and  all  for  human  wicked¬ 
ness.  And  how  often,  during  the  seventy-five  years  of  his  after 
life,  'must  the  story  of  that  fiery  storm,  together  with  the  atten¬ 
dant  circumstances  of  his  interview  with  the  Almighty,  when  ten 
righteous  men  would  have  prevented  it,  have  been  told  over  to 
his  children  and  grand-children  ;  and,  in  those  days  when  oral 
communication  was  almost  the  sole  medium  of  information,  been 
rehearsed  also  again  and  again  to  circles  of  eager  and  awe-struck 
listeners,  accompanied  by  his  own  pious  warnings  and  reflections, 
until  it  became  wrought  as  a  permanent  tradition  into  the  mind 
of  succeeding  nations,  furnishing  thus  a  mighty  warning  for  the 
Spirit’s  operat  on. 

So  the  dealings  of  God  with  his  people  Israel  in  the  way  of 
judgment  and  mercy  through  a  long  series  of  years — their  great 
deliverance  from  bondage,  the  overthrow  of  their  Egyptian  per- 


200 


secutors,  and  their  forty  years  of  wandering  in  the  wilderness, 
culminating  in  the  ruin  of  the  temple,  and  the  captivity  of  the 
nation  for  their  sin,  have  entered  into  history  as  a  potent  warn¬ 
ing,  which  the  Spirit  of  God  is  ever  using  ;  for  “  these  things 
were  our  examples ,  to  the  intent  we  should  not  lust  after  evil 
things  as  they  also  lusted."  Also,  “All  these  things  happened 
unto  them  for  examples ;  and  they  are  written  for  our  admoni¬ 
tion.  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world  are  come.”  (1  Cor.  10  :  6, 

HO 

The  point  is,  that  the  strivings  of  the  Spirit  may  go  so  en¬ 
tirely  hand  in  hand  with  Divine  providence,  that  the  former  are, 
to  a  great  extent,  limited  by  the  latter  ;  for  the  Spirit  works 
through  truth  and  motive ;  and  only  as  motives  are  created  by 
these  Providences  can  the  Spirit  use  them.  At  all  events,  as 
God’s  providence  works  on,  and  motives  multiply,  the  conver 
sion  of  men  is  manifestly  keeping  pace  with  them,  and  the  world 
advancing  to  the  glory  of  the  millenium. 

4.  But  doubtless  the  great  limitation  to  the  work  of  Divine 
Grace  is  found  in  the  disinclination  of  the  free  will  to  submit  to 
the  necessary  restraints  of  God’s  law  and  government. 

It  is  well  for  those  who  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  the 
operation  of  the  Spirit  as  adequate  to  the  production  of  all  moral 
results,  and  human  conversion  and  salvation  a  matter  as  easy  of 
accomplishment  by  the  Almighty  as  the  creation  of  material 
things,  to  remember  how  entirely  contrary  to  this  are  the  repre¬ 
sentations  of  the  Bible.  That  speaks  of  men  as  resisting  God, 
and  resisting  him  successfully. 

The  Almighty  Savior  “  could  not  ”  do  the  mighty  works 
because  of  human  “unbelief.”  He  was  thwarted  in  his  gracious 
designs  towards  Jerusalem,  and  “  would  often  have  gathered  her 
children  together  ”  under  his  protection  “  but  they  would  not.” 
Stephen’s  declaration  was. — “Ye  do  always  resist  the  Holy 
Ghost.”  (Acts  7  :  51.)  In  Eph.  1 : 19,  the  conversion  of  men  is 
likened  to  the  “working  of  God’s  mighty  power  which  he 
wrought  in  Christ  when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead.” 

The  righteous  even  are'  “  scarcely  saved,”  so  that  although 
subjects  of  God’s  converting  grace,  they  yet  barely  escape  per¬ 
dition  ;  and  although  the  omnipotent  Spirit  of  God  is  working 
in  them,  it  is  still  necessary  for  them  to  be  ever,  “  with  fear  and 
trembling,  working  out  their  own  salvation.”  Also  nothing 
more  astonishes  a  Christian  than  the  internal  consciousness  of 
the  desperate  wickedness  of  his  own  heart,  and  the  constant  and 
painful  effort  required  to  make  anything  like  suitable  progress  in 
the  divine  life. 

But  whatever  the  limitations  of  grace  may  be,  of  one  thing 
we  are  certain,  that,  so  far  as  God  is  concerned,  they  are  un¬ 
avoidable.  It  is  ever  to  be  held  as  a  fixed  and  fundamental  fact 


201 


that  the  entire  heart  of  God  is  set  on  the  salvation  of  all  his 
creatures  ;  that  he  “  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved  ;  ”  that  Christ 
died  for  all ;  that  the  Spirit  strives  earnestly  with  all ;  and  that 
no  possible  efforts  in  tne  direction  of  salvation  have  been  omit¬ 
ted.  Furthermore,  that  ail  might  be  saved  if  they  would  ;  that 
God  would  be  supremely  delighted  if,  with  the  vast  amount  of 
effort  he  has  made  to  save  all  men,  all  would  repent  and  believe  ; 
and  that  the  economy  of  Divine  Grace,  as  wTell  as  that  of  Divine 
Providence,  have  been  exhausted  in  the  securing  of  human 
salvation, 

It  appears  therefore,  that  the  position  assumed  by  many 
that,  because  the  provisions  of  the  Atonement  are  infinite,  they 
will  certainly  overpower,  at  length,  both  sin  and  its  evils 
throughout  the  universe,  and  restore  all  moral  beings  to  holi¬ 
ness  and  happiness,  rests  on  no  defensible  foundation. 

III.  Individual  Salvation. 

.  Why  is  one  saved  and  another  not  ?  For  example — In  a 
certain  community,  and  perhaps  in  the  same  family,  A  repents, 
believes  and  is  saved.  B  refuses  to  do  either  and  is  lost.  Why 
the  difference?  Is  it  asserted  as  a  reason,  that  God  gives  to  A 
more  of  the  influences  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  or  influences  differing 
in  kind  from  those  B  has?  The  assertion  cannot  be  proved 
from  anv  source  whatever. 

•j 

Is  it  said  as  a  reason,  that  it  was  owing  to  some  difference 
in  the  original  constitution  of  each  ?  The  assertion  is  incapable 
of  proof.  ' 

Is  the  reason  said  to  be  a  difference  in  external  circum¬ 
stances,  or  in  Providential  dealings  ?  There  is  no  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  this 

What  God  does,  if  anything,  'more  for  thos^  who  re¬ 
pent  and  believe,  than  for  those  who  do  not,  as  a  reason  v:hy 
they  repent,  we  know  not  for  he  has  not  told  us.  He  certainly 
does  more  for  some  than  others.  For  example — He  met  Saul  of 
Tarsus  in  his  journey,  and  spoke  to  him  in  an  audible  voice  from 
heaven,  and  thus  arrested  him,  and  he  declared  to  Annanias  that 
he  was  a  “  chosen  vessel  ”  unto  him.  He  has  other  chosen  ves¬ 
sels,  and  has  his  own  way  of  leading  them  to  repentance  ;  some¬ 
times,  apparent^,  by  some  striking  providence,  but  generally  by 
nothing  special  that  we  know  of,  except  the  truth  that  is  preached 
to  all  alike.  We  know  that  God  uses  in  the  conversion  of  men 
truth,  providence,  and  motives  of  all  kinds,  and  also  that  they 
all  would  be  powerless  without  the  Spirit ;  but  what  that  exact 
truth  or  influence  or  instrumentality  is  which  the  Spirit  uses, 
and  which  determines  salvation,  we  know  not.  “  We  hear  the 
sound  thereof  but  cannot  tell  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it 
goeth.”  (Jno.  3 :  8.) 


202 


But  now  let  the  simple  question  be — Why  does  A  repent? 
and  to  this  there  is  a  clear  and  satisfactory  answer — Because 
God  “  began  the  good  work  ”  by  what  he  did  for  him  ;  giving 
his  Son  to  die  for  him  ;  sending  the  Spirit  to  strive  in  his  heart ; 
and  exerting  various  influences  of  his  Providence  to  lead  him  to 
repentance  ;  and  he  saw  and  felt  that  repentance  was  reasonable  ; 
and  his  voluntarily  yielding  to  and  following  these  influences, 
was  only  the  natural  and  reasonable  exercise  of  his  moral  fac¬ 
ulties  ;  so  that  about  A’s  repentance  and  salvation  there  appears 
to  be  no  particular  mystery.  He  was  urged  to  repent ;  he  was 
free  to  repent ;  he  knew  he  ought  to  repent ;  he  did  repent. 

But  why  does  B  not  repent?  To  this  no  good  answer  can 
be  given.  Here  all  is  mystery.  Why  B,  for  whose  salvation 
God  does  all  that  was  necessary,  and  all  that  he  could  consist¬ 
ently  do,  and  even,  for  all  that  can  be  shown  to  the  contrary,  all 
that  he  does  for  the  salvation  of  A,  should  still  resist  him  and 
remain  in  impenitence,  there  is  no  satisfactory  explanation,  any 
more  than  why  he  should  sin  at  all •  and  his  persistent  resist¬ 
ance  of  God,  like  all  his  other  sin,  is  the  height  of  folly  and  mad¬ 
ness.  As  the  Scripture  expresses  it,  “  Madness  is  in  his  heart.” 
(Ecc.  9  :  3.)  He  shows  wisdom  in  consulting  for  his  temporal 
good  in  a  great  variety  of  ways — laboring  diligently,  practicing 
self-denial,  and  seeking  the  help,  favor  and  good  opinion  of  his 
fellow-men;  and  why  he  should  not  consult  as  well  for  his  spir¬ 
itual  and  eternal  welfare  by  seeking  the  favor  and  friendship  of 
God,  no  one  can  say.  Indeed  there  is  no  reason  for  it.  His 
course  is  eminently  imreasonable — without  reason,  and  his 
neglect  of  personal  salvation,  unnatural  and  monstrous,  as  well 
as  an  inexplicable  mystery.  We  can  only  say,  he  dislikes  hearty 
and  affectionate  submission  to  God,  and  so  refuses  to  yield  it. 
He  prefers  rather  his  own  way,  though  he  knows  God’s  way  is 
the  best ;  and  therefore,  determines  to  have  his  own  Cay  and 
dare  the  consequences.* 

To  sum  up  what  has  been  said,  the  questions  men  ask  may 
be  answered  thus  : 

“  To  how  great  an  extent  does  God  exert  the  influences  of 
his  Holy  Spirit  in  the  salvation  of  sinners?”  Certainly  to  the 
full  extent  that  he  'wisely  can,  and  perhaps  that  he  safely  can. 

“  Why  does  any  one  repent  ?  ”  For  the  single  reason  that 

*  Exception  is  sometimes  taken  to  the  expression  in  the  Assembly’s 
Catechism  which  speaks  of  God  as  “  renewing  the  will.”  Undoubtedly 
this  phraseology  perfectly  accords  with  the  doctrine  of  irresistible  grace, 
but  not  whh  an  intelligent  conception  of  moral  freedom.  A  more  truth¬ 
ful  conception  of  the  matter  of  conversion  is  that  God  never  touches  the 
will — is  very  careful  not  to,  lest  the  freedom  of  the  agent  be  impaired; 
that  he  affects  only  the  antecedents  of  volition;  and  even  these  only  in 
the  most  careful  manner,  so  as  to  leave  the  moral  being  absolutely  free. 
A  •change,  therefore,  in  the  above  phraseology  seems  desirable. 


203 


God  “  begins  the  good  work  ”  through  his  Truth,  Providence 
and  Spirit  working  within  him  and  without  him  ;  and  were  it 
not  for  this,  he  would  never  take  a  single  step  in  the  direction  of 
penitence  and  salvation. 

“Why  does  any  one  not  repent?  ”  For  no  conceivable  rea¬ 
son,  and  his  continued  impenitence  like  all  his  other  sin,  is  inex¬ 
plicable  folly. 

“Why  is  any  man  saved?”  For  two  reasons — First,  on 
account  of  what  God  does  for  him  through  the  workings  of  his 
truth,  providence  and  Spirit ;  and  Secondly,  on  account  of  what 
he  does  for  himself,  by  repenting  of  his  sins  and  believing  in 
Christ, 

“  Why  is  any  man  lost  ?  ”  Because  notwithstanding  all  God 
has  done  for  him,  he  will  do  nothing  for  himself.  He  will  not 
he  saved.  “  Ye  will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  might  have  life.”  * 

“Is  there  any  possibility  of  all  being  saved?”  If  with 
what  God  has  done  for  the  salvation  of  all, — and  he  has  con¬ 
fessedly  done  a  vast  deal — all,  even  Judas,  would  repent  and 
believe,  God  would  be  supremely  delighted,  for  he  “  sent  not 
his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world  but  that  the  world 
through  him  might  he  saved,”  and  he  even  “tasted  death  for 
every  man.” 

“  Why  does  he  not  exert  the  influences  of  his  Grace  to  save 
men  to  a  greater  extent  than  he  does,  even  to  an  unlimited  ex¬ 
tent,  so  as  to  secure  the  holiness  and  happiness  of  all  created 
beings?”  Because,  for  some  reason  not  revealed,  he  cannot. 
Somewhere  or  somehow  there  comes  into  the  Divine  administra¬ 
tion  limitations  of  grace  which  must  not  be  transcended;  so  that 
there  is  a  point  beyond  which  God  cannot  wisely  use  those  in¬ 
fluences  even  for  the  salvation  of  those  whom  he  loves  with  an 
infinite  affection,  and  yearns  over  with  an  infinite  pity. 

Foreknowledge,  Foreordination  and  Election. 

Can  there  not  be  a  statement  of  these  doctrines  which  shall 
commend  itself  to  all  as  being  entirely  scriptural  ?  The  follow¬ 
ing  is  an  effort  in  this  direction  : 

*  Some,  by  a  careless  and  unwarrantable  use  of  language,  say  that 
God  permits  some  to  be  lost.  Whom  does  he  permit  to  be  lost  ?  There 
is  not  a  sinner  on  earth  for  whose  salvation  he  has  not  made  an  infinite 
sacrifice  in  the  sufferings  and  death  of  his  own  Son;  not  one  whom  he 
has  not  followed  tenderly  and  lovingly  with  every  kind  of  providential 
dealing  tending  to  his  salvation;  not  one  to  whom  he  has  not  given  the 
strivings  of  his  infinite  Spirit;  thus  showing  his  entire  unwillingness 
that  he  should  perish.  To  say,  therefore,  that  God  permits  a  man  to  be 
lost,  is  an  utter  perversion  of  language;  because  the  word  permit  always 
implies  a  willingness  respecting  the  thing  permitted;  and  God  is  “ not 
willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance.” 
(2  Pet.  3:9.) 


204 


1.  Foreknowledge. 

In  the  scripture  representation,  Foreknowledge  appears  to 
come,  in  the  order  of  nature,  before  the  Electing  Purpose — 
“Whom  he  did  foreknow  he  also  did  predestinate”  (Rom.  8:29.) 

What  does  God  foreknow  ? 

1.  All  possibilities  as  when  Christ  says,  “  If  the  mighty 
works  which  have  been  done  in  thee,  had  been  done  in  Sodom,  it 
would  have  remained  until  this  day.”  (Matt.  11  :  23.)  Such 
events  are  mere  possibilities ,  not  actualities  ;  there  having  been 
no  determination  in  the  Divine  Mind  that  they  shall  take  place. 
Therefore,  in  accordance  with  this — 

2.  He  foreknows,  as  possible,  that  if  he  should  create  A  a 
free  moral  agent,  and  deal  with  him  as  a  free  moral  agent, — as  a 
sinner  provide  for  him  an  Atonement,  bring  his  mind  in  contact 
with  the  Truth,  work  in  him  by  his  Holy  Spirit,  and  surround 
him  with  all  the  varied  and  constant  round  of  Providential  deal¬ 
ings  which  he  meets  with  in  this  world,  he  would  repent,  believe 
and  be  saved. 

Notice  here,  that  we  are  contemplating  the  Divine  Mind  as 
regarding  this  only  as  a  possibility,  and  not  an  actuality — some¬ 
thing  not  yet  foreordained ;  no  purpose  of  his  that  he  will  actual¬ 
ly  create  him  and  make  these  efforts  with  him,  having  37et  been 
formed.  In  this  view  his  foreknowledge  is  contemplating  his 
future  efforts  for  A’s  salvation,  and  their  certain  results,  as  pos¬ 
sibilities  and  not  actualities.  But  now, 

3.  He  foreknows  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  the  case  of  A, 
he  will  thus  create,  and  thus  deal  with  him,  and  that  these  efforts 
in  his  behalf,  will,  as  a  matter  of  fact ,  result  in  A’s  repentance, 
faith  and  final  salvation.  He  foreknows,  therefore,  that  A  will 
be  saved.  Thus  much  for  the  matter  of  foreknowledge. 

2.  Foreordination. 

1.  God  does  not  foreordain  that  A  shall  repent,  and  shall 
believe  and  shall  be  saved,  but 

2.  He  does  foreordain  the  mighty  agencies  and  instrumen¬ 
talities  that  he  will  set  in  operation  for  A’s  repentance,  faith  and 
salvation,  and  which  he  foreknows  will  be  successful  in  accom¬ 
plishing  the  work. 

3.  By  foreordaining,  or  predetermining  to  make  these 
efforts  in  his  behalf,  knowing  what  the  result  will  be,  he,  in  this 
way ,  “  predestiuates  him  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his 
Son  (Rom.  8  :  29)  that  is,  he  settles  the  certainty  of  this  result. 

Also  foreknowing  what  the  result  of  “  calling”  him  would  be, 
he  also  predetermined  to  “  call  ”  him  ;  and  when  he  had  heard 
and  obeyed  the  call*  and  not  till  then,  he  “justified”  him ;  and 
then  completed  the  work  in  his  final  “  glorification.” 


203 

,  3.  Election. 

The  matter  of  Election  is  stated  more  fully  than  in  any  other 
single  verse  in  the  Bible,  in  2  Tlies.  2  :  13 — “God  hath  from  the 
beginning  chosen  you  to  salvation  through  sanctification  of  the 
spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth.”  Here  notice 

1.  To  what  A  (elect)  is  chosen,  namely,  “ salvation” 

2.  That  the  electing  purpose  or  determination  of  God,  does 
not  refer  merely  to  the  fact  of  A’s  salvation,  but  to  the  fact  also 
that  he  will  use  the  Holy  Spirit  to  accomplish  it — He  is  “  chosen 
through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit.”  The  purpose  is  thus  car¬ 
ried  out  into  action,  and  the  action  gives  the  purpose  all  its  effi¬ 
ciency  for  good.  The  mere  purpose  of  God  does  not  save  ;  but 
that  which  saves  is  the  carrying  out  of  the  purpose  in  efficient 
effort  to  secure  the  salvation.  And  this  efficient  agency  or  effort 
is  comprehended  in  the  electing  purpose.  It  is  not  a  mere  pur¬ 
pose  to  save,  but  to  save  in  this  particular  way — “  through”  his 
own  personal  agency  in  giving  the  sanctifying  influences  of  his 
Holy  Spirit” — or  by  means  of  this  Divine  Agency. 

God’s  electing  purpose,  therefore,  is  that  he  will  use  the 
Holy  Spirit  for  A’s  salvation,  knowing  that  the  effort  will  be  suc¬ 
cessful  ;  so  that  he  is  “  chosen  through ”  the  sanctifying  agency, 
effort  and  operation  of  the  Divine  Spirit. 

3.  That  the  salvation  is  actually  accmoplished  only  by  an 
additional  agency — the  man’s  own  “  belief  of  the  truth .”  And, 
in  the  Divine  choice  to  salvation,  this  is  as  distinctly  taken  into 
the  account,  as  is  the  bestowal  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  no  pur¬ 
pose  of  God,  and  no  agency  of  the  Spirit,  would  be  sufficient 
without  this.  He  is  “  chosen  to  salvation”  as  truly  “  through^ 
his  own  “  belief  of  the  truth,”  as  “  through ”  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit  ;  that  is — the  mail’s  own  co-operating  agency  is  just  as 
truly  essential  to  the  result  of  salvation,  as  is  the  agency  of  God 
in  the  bestowment  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  and  is  as  distinctly  taken 
into  account  in  the  Divine  purpose  of  election. 

4.  Election  Conditional  and  Unconditional. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  in  this  passage  2  Thes.  2;  13,  the 
final  result  of  salvation  is  secured  by  two  distinct  agencies — The 
gift  of  the  Spirit  by  God,  and  the  faith  exercised  by  man.  Now, 

1.  So  far  as  the  election  to  salvation  depends  on  the  man’s 
exercise  of  faith,  it  is  conditional  election  ;  that  is  his  salvation 
is  conditional  on  this  exercise  of  faith ;  for  he  could  not  be  saved 
without  it. 

2.  So  far  as  election  to  salvation  depends  on  the  gift  of  the 
Spirit,  it  is  unconditional  j  for  God  gives  the  Spirit  as  he  will — 
when  he  will,  how  he  will,  and  with  what  “  measure1  he  will. 

Election  to  salvation  is,  therefore,  partly  conditional  and 


206 


partly  unconditional — conditional  so  far  as  it  depends  on  the 
man’s  work  ;  unconditional  so  far  as  it  depends  on  the  Spirit’s 
work. 

But  how  about  “  foresee  faith  and  good  works  ?”  Is  there 
election  to  these  ?  Answer  All  good  deeds  which  precede  sal¬ 
vation,  and  on  which  salvation  depends — all  Christian  graces,  are 
“  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit,”  (Gal.  5  :  22),  and  are  the  result  of  God’s 
efforts ;  and  these  efforts  God  puts  forth  of  his  own  free  will 
alone  ;  they  are  conditioned  on  nothing  ;  and  his  eternal  purpose 
to  put  them  forth  is  unconditional — “  Of  his  own  will  begat  he 
us.”  James  1  :  18).  Election,  therefore,  to  good  works ,  and  the 
purpose  to  make  those  efforts  that  will  result  in  good  works ,  is 
entirely  unconditional. 

Some  insist  that  election  is  election  to  salvation  only.  But 
in  that  case  it  would  seem  that  the  passage  in  John  6  :  37  should 
read  :  The  father  givetli  me  all  that  will  come  to  me  ;  (which  is 
most  certainly  true)  but  the  declaration  of  the  Savior  is  more  than 
this.  “All  that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me,”  as  if  the 
election  of  the  Father  was  the  reason  of  their  coming  to  Christ — 
as  if,  therefore,  they  were  elected  to  come  to  Christ ,  as  well  as  to 
be  saved.  This  reads  like  election  to  the  faith  in  Christ  as  wTell 
as  to  salvation. 

But  now  notice — How  does  God  “  give”  the  elect  to  Christ  ? 
How  does  he  elect  them  to  the  faith  in  Christ  ?  Answer — By 
making  those  efforts  with  them  by  his  Word,  Providence  and 
Spirit,  which  he  foreknows  will  be  successful  in  leading  them  to 
the  exercise  of  faith  ;  and  it  is  only  in  this  sense  that  they  are 
elected  to  the  good  works  of  repentance  and  faith. 

Notice  again — Why  do  they  come  to  Christ?  Answer — 
Because  of  these  efforts  of  God  in  their  behalf;  and  were  it  not 
for  these,  no  man  would,  of  himself,  ever  take  a  single  step  in  the 
direction  of  repentance  and  faith  ;  so  that  here  also  it  appears 
that,  in  this  sense  only,  they  are  elected  to  the  good  works  of  re¬ 
pentance  and  faith,  as  well  as  to  the  final  result  of  salvation — 
God  elects  them  to  these  good  works,  by  making  such  efforts  to 
lead  them  to  do  them,  as  he  foreknows  will  be  successful. 

The  declaration,  therefore,  “Elect  unto  obedience?”  (1  Pet. 
1 :2),  means  this — God’s  eternal  purpose  to  make  efforts  with  a 
man  by  his  Word,  Providence  and  Spirit:  foreknowing  that  they 
will  result  in  this  “obedience.”  In  the  same  way  are  to  be  inter 
preted  other  similar  passages.  “Chosen  that  we  should  be  holy.” 
(Eph.  1  :  4.)  How  chosen  ?  Answer — By  an  eternal  purpose  to 
make  efforts  to  secure  the  holiness.  “  Begins  the  good  work.” 
(Phil.  1:6).  IIr,w  is  the  good  work  begun?  Answer — By  an 
eternal  purpose  to  make  efforts  for  it.  Paul  says — “  (Jailed  me 
by  his  grace.”  (Col.  1:  15).  How  was  he  called?  By  the  eternal 
purpose  of  God,  to  meet  him  on  the  way  to  Damascus.  “  Pre- 


207 


destinated  to  be  conformed  to  tlie  image  of  his  son.”  (Rom. 
8:29).  How  predestinated  ?  By  an  eternal  purpose  to  make 
efforts  to  have  them  thus  “  conformed,”  in  full  view  of  the  actual 
result. 

But  whatever  influences  or  agencies  may  be  exerted  by  the 
Almighty  in  the  work  of  human  conversion,  the  man’s  own  free, 
voluntary,  co-operating  agency  is  indispensable  to  securing  the 
final  result  of  salvation ;  and  this  is  why  he  is  called  upon  to 
“give  diligence  to  make  his  own  calling  and  election  sure." 
(2  Pet,  1:10) 

On  the  whole  then — How  does  God  elect  a  man  %  Answer  : 
By  his  eternal  purpose  to  make  those  efforts  for  his  conversion 
through  his  \v  ord,  Providence  and  Spirit  which  he  foreknows 
will  be  successful;  so  that  he  is  “  elect  according  'to  the  fore¬ 
knowledge  of  God.” 

The  following  is  sometimes  heard — “The  elect  are  whoso¬ 
ever  will,  and  the  non-elect  are  whosoever  won’t.” 

1.  “  The  elect  are  whosoever  will.”  This  is  true  but  omits 
the  most  important  part.  T Vhy  does  the  man  will  ?  Answer — 
Because  of  God’s  mighty  efforts  to  induce  him  to,  and  were  it 
not  for  these,  he  never  would  take  a  single  step  in  the  direction 
of  repentance.  And  so,  about  the  conversion  of  A  (elect)  there 
is  no  real  or  apparent  mystery.  God  urged  him  to  repent.  He 
was  free  to  repent.  He  knew  he  ought  to  repent.  He  did  re¬ 
pent. 

2.  “The  non  elect  are  whosoever  won’t.  This  states  cor¬ 
rectly  the  entire  case  respecting  the  non-elect ;  but  for  it  there 
seems  to  be  no  conceivable  explanation.  The  fact  appears  to  be 
that  God  determines  to  follow  them  also  with  his  Word,  Prov¬ 
idence  and  Spirit,  knowing  still  that  they  will  resist  all  his  kind 
efforts  for  their  salvation  and  be  lost ;  but  why  they  should  thus 
resist  is  a  profound  and  iu explicable  mystery. 

5.  Definition  of  Election. 

God’s  eternal  purpose  to  introduce  into  this  world  of  sin¬ 
ners  a  system  of  grace  adequate  to  the  salvation  of  all  men,  and 
which  he  foreknows  will,  in  the  case  of  certain  individuals,  be 
successful  in  leading  them  to  repentance.  These  certain  individ¬ 
uals  are  the  elect.  More  concisely  stated  thus — God’s  eternal 
purpose  to  make  efforts  for  a  man’s  salvation,  foreknowing  that 
they  will  be  successful. 

# 

V.  Rep  rotation. 

It  has  been  taught  that  as  some  are  elected  to  be  saved,  so 
all  others  are  elected  to  be  lost  :  and  this  election  to  Perdition 
was  called  Reprobation — a  perfectly  outrageous  and  unjustiha- 


208 


ble  representation  of  the  entire  teachings  of  the  Bible.  For,  to 
say  that  God  chooses  that  any  man  should  be  lost,  flatly  con¬ 
tradicts  the  plain  declaration,  “  Not  willing  that  any  should  per¬ 
ish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance.”  (2  Pet.  3:9.) 

But,  it  is  asked — If  God  foreknows  that  if  he  creates  a 
moral  system  some  will  be  lost,  why  is  not  his  determination  to 
create  the  system,  in  full  view  of  this  result,  equivalent  to 
choosing  them  to  be  damned  ?  Answer  : 

1.  The  only  reason  why  God  determines  to  create  a  moral 
system  is  for  the  sake  of  the  holiness  and  happiness  which  will 
ultimately  be  secured  by  it. 

2.  In  his  purpose  respecting  a  moral  system,  two  distinct 
matters  enter  into  it — First,  that  he  will  create  a  system  of  free 
moral  agents,  and  Secondly,  that  he  will  throw  on  each  individual 
the  entire  responsibility  for  the  formation  of  his  own  character. 

3.  He  purposes  to  use  a  vast  amount  of  instrumentality  to 
induce  every  man  in  this  world  to  become  righteous  and  be 
saved.  Therefore  : 

4.  The  only  reason  why  any  man  is  lost  is  that  he  resists 
all  of  God’s  efforts  to  save  him ;  so  that  the  foreknowledge  of 
God  respecting  him  is  just  this — He  foreknows  that  the  man 
will  destroy  himself,  notwithstanding  all  that  He  himself  can 
consistently  do  to  prevent  it. 

6.  On  the  whole,  therefore,  the  case  amounts  to  this — If 
benevolence  demand  the  existence  of  a  moral  system,  then  moral 
beings  must  be  created ,  whatever  use  they  make  of  their  free 
agency ;  and  if  God  does  the  best  he  can  to  save  them,  and  they 
resist  him,  the  responsibility  of  their  ruin  rests  not  with  him  ; 
they  alone  are  responsible  for  it,  and  assume  the  entire  burden 
of  their  condemnation.  And  even  as  in  the  case  of  the  Elect,  the 
certainty  of  their  salvation  is  not  settled  merely  by  the  purpose, 
of  God  to  create  them  and  place  them  in  this  world,  but  by  their 
own  personal  efforts  in  “  working  out  salvation  with  fear  and 
trembling,”  and  thus  rendering  “their  calling  and  election  sure,” 
so  the  perdition  of  ungodly  men,  is  not  rendered  certain  merely 
by  God’s  creation  of  them  as  a  part  of  the  moral  system,  but  by 
their  own  willful  and  wicked  resistance  to  all  of  his  mighty  efforts 
for  their  salvation.  Even  it  will  finally  appear  that  the  sinner  is 
not  only  the  responsible  author  of  his  own  perdition  by  his  sin 
and  impenitence,  but  that  in  his  life  on  earth,  he  absolutely 
fought  the  Almighty  at  every  step  in  his  kind  efforts  to  save  him. 
He  neglected  the  great  salvation,  trampled  on  his  Savior,  re¬ 
sisted  the  Holy  Spirit,  turned  his  back  upon  all.  the  warnings, 
invitations  and  efforts  of  his  Maker  to  draw  him  and  even  drag 
him  from  his  sinful  course,  and  with  devilish  persistency  fought 
his  way  through  to  perdition,  and  is,  therefore,  at  every  step,  the 
responsible  author  of  his  own  sin  and  ruin. 


209 


It  is  evident  in  this  view  that  the  doctrine  which  has  some¬ 
times  been  taught,  that  God  created  men  expecting  and  intend¬ 
ing  that  they  shall  be  lost,  when  he  might  save  them — choosing 
some  to  be  lost ;  or  the  representation  that  God  permits  moral 
beings  to  perish  eternally  that  he  may  illustrate  thereby  the  per¬ 
fections  of  his  own  character,  and  thus  promote  his  own  glory  in 
the  eyes  of  his  universe,  is  exceedingly  repulsive,  and  contradicts 
his  own  plain  declaration  that  he  has  no  pleasure  “  at  all  ”  in  the 
death  of  the  wicked ;  which  he  certainly  would  have,  were  it  on 
the  whole  for  his  glory.  No,  God  created  beings  only  to  be 
saved — “  He  sent  his  Son  into  the  world  that  the  world  through 
him  might  be  saved,”  and  is  “  not  willing  that  any  should  per¬ 
ish.”  As  Dr.  Tyng  once  said  in  his  pulpit  in  the  hearing  of  the 
writer — “  The  doctrine  of  Reprobation  is  not  between  the  lids  of 
the  Bible.” 


10 


APPENDIX  C. 


Bible  Testimony. 

No  candid  examination  of  Bible  teaching  upon  the  doctrine 
of  Endless  Punishment  is  possible,  except  as  a  man  heartily  con¬ 
cedes  in  his  own  mind  this  is  at  least — “This  doctrine  may  be 
true.  I  cannot  prove  that  it  is  not.  I  do  not  know  enough  to 
assert  that  the  foundations  of  au  endless  administration  over  an 
endless  universe  can  be  securely  laid  without  it.  It  is  not  there¬ 
fore  intrinsically  unreasonable.”  And  it  is  believed  that  no  one 
can  have  attentively  read  what  has  thus  far  been  written,  without 
reaching  at  least,  this  conviction. 

But  it  appears  also,  that  the  candid  mind  will  see  clearly  that 
our  argument  has  gone  beyond  this,  and  that,  not  only  has  it 
been  shown  that  the  unreasonableness  of  endless  punishment  can¬ 
not  be  demonstrated;  but  that  there  are  principles  of  Moral 
Government  universally  recognized,  which  involve  its  entire 
reasonableness ,  not  to  say  probability.  And  now  with  whatever 
degree  of  conviction  the  foregoing  argument  may  have  produced, 
we  come  reverently  to  consider  the  simple  teachings  of  the  Word 
of  God. 

These  are  so  plain  and  obvious  that  men  of  the  strongest 
minds,  who  reject  the  doctrine,  are  yet  compelled  to  admit  that 
the  Bible  teaches  it. 

Says  Starr  King — “  I  freely  say  that  I  do  not  find  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  men,  clearly  stated  in  any 
text  or  in  any  discourse  that  has  been  reported  from  the  lips  of 
Christ.” 

Says  Theodore  Parker — “  To  me  it  is  quite  clear  that  Jesus 
taught  the  doctrine  of  eternal  damnation,  if  the  Evangelists — 
the  first  three  I  mean — are  to  be  treated  as  inspired.  I  can  un¬ 
derstand  his  language  in  no  other  way,” 

A  reference  to  the  leading  passages  bearing  upon  the  doc¬ 
trine  in  question,  will  show  how  well  founded  are  the  above  con 
cessions. 

And  here  let  the  reader,  without  raising  the  question  whether 
the  passages  about  to  be  quoted  do  certainly  prove  the  doctrine 
or  not,  come  to  the  reading  of  them  in  some  such  way  as  this — 
Let  him  assume  that  the  doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment  is 
probably  true,  and  then  see  whether  the  general  drift  of  these 
declarations  is  not  just  what  he  would  expect  them  to  be  on  such 
an  assumption.  Do  they  not  at  least  lean  very  strongly  in  this 
direction?  And  then  think — Would  the  Bible  be  likely  even  to 
lean  towards  an  infinite  falsehood  ? 


211 

1.  The  Wicked  Excluded  from  Heaven. 

Matt.  2 :  20.  Except  your  righteousness  shall  exceed  the 
righteousness  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  case 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

7 :  14.  Straight  is  the  gate  and  narrow  is  the  way  which 
leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there  be  that  find  it. 

7  :  21.  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto  me  Lord,  Lord,  shall 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

7  :  23.  I  never  knew  you  ;  depart  from  me  ye  that  work 
iniquity. 

18  :  3.  Except  ye  be  converted  and  become  as  little  children, 
ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

Mark  10: 15.  Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of 
God  as  a  little  child,  he  shall  not  enter  therein. 

12  :  9.  He  that  denieth  me  before  men,  shall  be  denied  be¬ 
fore  the  angels  of  God. 

Luke  13  :  24.  Strive  to  enter  in  at  the  straight  gate;  for 
many,  I  say  unto  you,  will  seek  to  enter  in  and  shall  not  be  able. 

13  :  27.  Depart  from  me  all  ye  workers  of  iniquity. 

13:  28  There  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth,  when 
ye  shall  see  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob  and  all  the  prophets 
in  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  you  yourselves  thrust  out. 

John  3  :  3.  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

1  Cor.  1 :  9.  The  unrighteous  shall  not  inherit  the  king¬ 
dom  of  God.  Be  not  deceived  ;  neither  fornicators,  nor  idolaters, 
nor  effeminate,  nor  abusers  of  themselves  with  mankind ;  10,  nor 
thieves,  nor  covetous,  nor  drunkards,  nor  revilers,  nor  extortion¬ 
ers,  shall  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Gal.  5:  21.  They  which  do  such  things  shall  not  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

Epli.  5:5.  No  whoremonger  nor  unclean  person,  nor  covet¬ 
ous  man  who  is  an  idolator,  hath  any  inheritance  in  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  and  of  God. 

Heb.  4  :  1.  Let  us  therefore,  fear  lest,  a  promise  being  left 
us  of  entering  into  his  rest,  any  of  you  should  seem  to  come  short 
of  it. 

Rev.  21 :  27.  There  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  it  anything 
that  defileth,  neither  whatsoever  worketh  abomination,  or  maketh 
a  lie. 

Now  if  these  passages  do  not  imply  an  unqualified  exclusion 
of  the  wicked  from  Heaven — such  an  exclusion  as  would  be  incon¬ 
sistent  with  their  being  ever  admitted  there,  then  the  idea  cannot 
be  conveyed  in  human  language. 


212 

2.  The  Wicked  Sent  to  a  Place  of  Punishment. 

Matt.  7  :  13.  Wide  is  the  gate  and  broad  is  the  way  that 
leadeth  to  destruction,  and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat. 

3  :  12  The  children  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  cast  out  into 
outer  darkness  :  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth. . 

13  :  40.  As  therefore,  the  tares  are  gathered  and  burned  in 
the  fire  ;  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  this  world.  41.  The  Son  of 
Man  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his 
kingdom  all  things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity.  42. 
And  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire  ;  there  shall  be  wailing 
and  gnashing  of  teeth. 

13:  49.  So  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  the  world  ;  the  angels 
shall  come  forth  and  sever  the  wicked  from  among  the  just.  50. 
And  shall  cast  them  into  the  furnace  of  fire ;  there  shall  be  wail¬ 
ing  and  gnashing  of  teeth. 

22:  13.  Bind  him  hand  and  foot,  and  take  him  away,Tand 
cast  him  into  outer  darkness  ;  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnash¬ 
ing  of  teeth. 

24:  50.  The  Lord  of  that  servant  shall  come  in  a  day  when 
he  looketh  not  for  him,  and  in  an  hour  that  he  is  not  aware  of. 
51.  And  shall  cut  him  asunder,  and  appoint  him  his  portion  with 
the  hypocrites;  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth. 

25:30.  And  cast  ye  the  unprofitable  servant  into  outer 
darkness  ;  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth. 

25:41.  Then  shall  he  say  also  unto  them  on  the  left  hand, 
Depart  from  me  ye  cursed  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the 
Devil  and  his  angels. 

Luke  16:22.  The  rich  man  also  died  and  was  buried.  23. 
And  in  Hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  being  in  torments,  and  seeth 
Abraham  afar  off  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom.  24.  And  he  cried 
and  said,  “Father  Abraham,  have  mercy  on  me,  and  send  Lazarus 
that  he  may  dip  the  tip  of  his  finger  in  water,  and  cool  my 
tongue  ;  for  I  am  tormented  in  this  flame. 

John  5:  28.  All  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice. 
29.  And  shall  come  forth;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the 
resurrection  of  life;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resur¬ 
rection  of  damnation. 

Rom.  2:  5.  But  after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart, 
treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath,  and 
revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God. 

9:  22.  What  if  God,  willing  to  show  his  wrath,  and  to  make 
his  power  known,  endured  with  much  long  suffering  the  vessels 
of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction. 

Phil.  3:  19.  Whose  end  is  destruction. 

2.  Thes.  1:7,8.  The  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from 
heaven  with  his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance 


213 


on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

2  :  12.  That  they  all  might  be  damned  who  believed  not  the 
truth,  but  had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness. 

Heb.  10:  26.  If  we  sin  wilfully  after  that  we  have  received 
the  knowledge  of  truth,  there  remainetli  no  more  sacrifice  for 
sins.  27.  But  a  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery 
indignation,  which  shall  devour  the  adversaries.  28.  He  that 
despised  Moses’  law  died  without  mercy,  under  two  or  three  wit¬ 
nesses.  2  j.  Of  how  much  sorer  punishment  suppose  ye  he  shall 
be  thought  worthy  who  hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God. 
30.  Vengeance  belongeth  unto  me,  I  will  recompense,  saith  the 
Lord.  31.  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God. 

12:  29.  For  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire. 

1  Pet.  4 :  18.  If  the  righteous  scarcely  be  saved,  where  shall 
the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  ajDpear  % 

2  Pet.  2:  4.  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned,  but 
cast  them  down  to  hell,  and  delivered  them  into  chains  of  dark¬ 
ness  to  be  reserved  unto  judgment. 

2:9.  The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the  godly  out  of 
temptation,  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment 
to  be  punished. 

2  :  12.  And  shall  utterly  perish  in  their  own  corruption. 

3  : 7.  The  heavens  and  the  earth  which  are  now,  by  the 
same  word  are  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire  against  the  day 
of  judgment,  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men. 

Rev.  14 :  9.  If  any  man  worship  the  beast  and  his  image, 
and  receive  his  mark  in  his  forehead  or  in  his  hand,  10 — The 
same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of  God,  which  is 
poured  out  without  mixture  into  the  cup  of  his  indignation,  and 
he  shall  be  tormented  with  fire  and  brimstone,  in  the  presence  of 
the  holy  angels,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb. 

19 :  20.  And  the  beast  was  taken  and  with  him  the  false 
prophet.  *  *  *  These  both  were  cast  alive  into  a  lake  of 

fire  burning  with  brimstone. 

20  :  15.  And  whosoever  was  not  found  written  in  the  book 
of  life,  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 

21:8.  But  the  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and  the  abomina¬ 
ble,  and  murderers,  and  whoremongers,  and  sorcerers,  and  idol¬ 
aters,  and  all  liars,  shall  have  their  part  in  the  lake  which  burn¬ 
etii  with  fire  and  brimstone  ;  which  is  the  second  death. 

3.  The  Punishment  of  the  Wicked  Endless. 

Matt.  18:8.  If  thy  hand  or  thy  foot  offend  thee,  cut  them 
off  and  cast  them  from  thee  ;  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into 


214 


life  halt  or  maimed,  rather  than  having  two  hands  or  two  feet  to 
be  cast  into  everlasting  fire.  (Mark.)  Into  the  fire  that  never 
shall  be  quenched ;  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is 
not  quenched. 

25  :  46.  “  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  (aionion ) 

punishment ;  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal.”  {aionion.)  Now 
if  the  “life”  of  the  righteous  be  endless,  and  the  “punishment" 
of  the  wicked  be  not  endless,  then,  in  this  verse,  the  same  word, 
and  in  the  same  connection,  is  applied  to  things  between  which 
there  is  an  infinite  difference ;  an  inconsistency  and  absurdity  in 
the  use  of  language  which  has  no  parallel  in  the  weakest  of 
human  productions. 

26  : 24.  “  It  had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been 

born.”  What  is  this  but  existence  a  curse  ?  This  was  spoken 
of  Judas.  But  if  Judas  had,  at  length,  an  eternity  of  happiness, 
after  no  matter  how  much  of  finite  suffering,  his  existence  would 
have  been  an  infinite  blessing. 

Luke  3: 17.  Whose  fan  is  in  his  hand,  and  he  will  thor¬ 
oughly  purge  his  floor,  and  will  gather  the  wheat  into  his  gar¬ 
ner  ;  but  the  chaff  he  will  burn  with  fire  unquenchable. 

16  :  26.  “And  besides  all  this,  between  us  and  you  there  is 
a  great  gulf  fixed  ;  so  that  they  which  would  pass  from  hence  to 
you  cannot ;  neither  can  they  pass  to  us  that  would  come  from 
thence  ”  And,  therefore,  can  never  enter  Heaven. 

John  3  :  36.  He  that  belie veth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting 
life  ;  and  he  that  belie  veth  not  the  Son,  shall  not  see  life  ;  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him. 

8:21.  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins  ;  whither  I  go  ye  cannot 
come. 

2  Thes.  1 :  9.  Who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  de¬ 
struction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of 
his  power. 

2  Pet.  2 : 17.  These  are  wells  without  water,  clouds  that  are 
carried  with  a  tempest ;  to  whom  the  mist  of  darkness  is  reserved 
forever. 

Jude  6.  “  The  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but 

left  their  own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  ( aidiois ) 
chains  under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day.” 
This  word  is  used  in  only  one  other  place,  Rom.  1:20;  and 
there  in  reference  to  the  duration  of  God’s  power — “  his  eternal 
{aidiois)  power  and  Godhead.” 

7.  Even  as  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  the  cities  about 
them — are  set  forth  for  an  example  suffering  the  vengeance  of 
eternal  fire. 

13.  Wandering  stars,  to  whom  is  reserved  the  blackness  of 
darkness  forever. 

14:11.  “  And  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  for- 


215 

ever  ;  and  they  have  no  rest  day  nor  night.”  But  annihilation  is 
eternal  rest. 

Rev.  20  :  10.  “  The  Devil  that  deceived  them,  was  cast  into 

the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone  where  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  are,  and  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  for  ever  and 
ever.”  (eis  tons  aionas  ton  aionon.)  But  in  Rev.  5:  13,  John  heard 
,  the  whole  animated  creation  saying — “Blessing  and  honor  and 
glory  and  power  be  unto  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne  and 
unto  the  Lamb  forever  and  ever.”  ( eis  tons  aionas  ton  aionon)  the 
expression  in  each  being  precisely  the  same,  and  used  by  the 
same  writer. 

Now  in  view  of  such  language,  and  used  in  such  connec¬ 
tions,  to  assert  that  the  punishment  of  the  finally  wicked  is  any 
less  than  endless,  is  to  convict  the  Author  of  the  Bible  with  un¬ 
warrantable  and  even  wicked  trifling;  because  common  men,  such 
as  the  Bible  was  manifestly  written  for,  could  get  no  idea  of 
limited  punishment  from  such  declarations ;  for  if  they  do  not 
convey  the  idea  of  endless  punishment,  then  it  cannot  be  ex¬ 
pressed  in  the  language  in  which  the  Bible  was  written. 

Now  let  any  one  compare  the  preceding  quotations  with  the 
list  of  Bible  references  made  out  by  Canon  Farrar  in  the  Excursus 
to  his  “Eternal  Hope,”  in  his  effort  to  sustain  the  doctrine  of  a 
Future  Probation,  and  he  will  see  how  indefinite,  how  weak  and 
how  utterly  inconclusive  they  are  as  compared  with  the  foregoing. 

4.  Doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Many  have  the  impression  that  the  doctrine  of  Future  Pun¬ 
ishment  is  not  taught  in  the  Old  Testament.  But  note  the 
following  passages — 

Ps.  9:17.  “The  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  hell,  and  all  the 
nations  that  forget  God.”  The  hell  here  spoken  of  must,  mean 
more  than  the  grave;  for  the  grave  is  the  common  lot  of  both 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked;  while  this  is  a  particular  visitation 
upon  the  wicked;  and  what  can  it  mean  but  punishment  after 
death. 

Ps.  11:6.  Upon  the  Avicked  he  shall  rain  snares,  fire  and 
brimstone  and  an  horrible  tempest;  this  shall  be  the  portion  of 
their  cup. 

Is.  30:33.  For  Tophet  is  ordained  of  old;  yea,  for  the  king 
it  is  prepared;  he  hath  made  it  deep  and  large:  the  pile  thereof 
is  fire  and  much  wood;  the  breath  of  the  Lord,  like  a  stream  of 
brimstone,  doth  kindle  it. 

Is.  33:14.  The  sinners  in  Zion  are  afraid  ;  fearfulness 
hath  surprised  the  hypocrites.  Who  among  us  shall  dwell  with 
devouring  fire?  who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  everlasting 
burnings? 


2 16 


Daniel  12:2,  “And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of 
the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame 
and  everlasting  contempt;”  the  word  translated  everlasting ,  being, 
in  the  original  Hebrew,  the  same  m  both  members. 

Mai.  4:1.  For  behold  the  day  cometh  that  shall  burn  as  an 
oven;  and  all  the  proud,  yea  and  all  that  do  wickedly,  shall  be 
stubble:  and  the  day  that  cometh  shall  burn  them  up,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts,  that  it  shall  leave  them  neither  root  nor  branch. 

Quotation  from  Richard  Baxter. 

And  now  to  the  poor,  thoughtless  ones  who  are  going  into 
eternity  with  no  proper  preparation  wherewith  to  meet  it,  comes 
the  solemn  address  and  warning  of  Richard  Baxter: 

“  Men  and  Brethren :  The  Eternal  God  that  made  vou  for 
a  life  everlasting,  and  hath  redeemed  you  by  his  only  Son,  when 
you  had  lost  it  and'yourselves,  being  mindful  of  you  in  your  sin 
and  misery,  hath  indited  the  gospel,  and  sealed  it  by  his  Spirit, 
and  commanded  his  ministers  to  preach  it  to  the  world,  that  par¬ 
don  being  freely  offered  you,  and  heaven  being  set  before  you, 
he  might  call  you  off  from  your  fleshly  pleasures,  and  from  fol¬ 
lowing  after  this  deceitful  world,  and  acquaint  you  with  the  life 
you  were  created  and  redeemed  for,  before  you  are  dead  and 
past  remedy. 

“  The  Lord  seeth  how  you  forget  him  and  your  latter  end, 
and  how  light  you  make  of  everlasting  things,  as  men  that  un¬ 
derstand  not  what  they  have  to  do  or  suffer.  He  seeth  how  bold 
you  are  in  sin,  and  how  fearless  of  his  threatenings,  and  how 
careless  of  your  souls.  He  seeth  the  dreadful  day  at  hand,  when 
your  sorrows  will  begin,  and  you  must  lament  all  this  with  fruit¬ 
less  cries  in  torment  and  desperation,  if  true  conversion  now 
prevent  it  not. 

“  O  sinners,  that  you  but  knew  what  you  are  doing,  and 
whom  you  are  all  this  while  offending  !  The  sun  itself  is  dark¬ 
ness  before  the  glory  of  that  Majesty  which  you  daily  abuse  and 
carelessly  provoke.  O  that  you  did  but  a  little  know  what  case 
that  wretched  soul  is  in  that  hath  engaged  the  living  God  against 
him  !  If  God  be  against  thee,  all  things  are  against  thee.  This 
world  is  but  thy  prison,  for  all  thou  so  lovest  it,  and  thou  art  but 
reserved  in  it  to  the  day  of  wrath.  The  Judge  is  coming;  thy 
soul  is  even  now  going.  Yet  a  little  Avhile,  and  thy  friend  shall 
say  of  thee,  ‘  He  is  dead; 1  and  then  thou  shalt  see  the  things  that 
now  thou  dost  despise,  and  feel  that  which  now  thou  wilt  not 
believe.  O  poor  soul  !  there  is  nothing  but  a  slender  veil  of  flesh 
between  thee  and  that  amazing  sight,  which  will  quickly  silence 
thee,  and  turn  thy  tone,  and  make  thee  of  another  mind.  As 
soon  as  death  hath  drawn  this  curtain,  thou  shalt  see  that  which 


217 


will  quickly  leave  thee  speechless.  And  how  quickly  will  that 
day  and  that  hour  come  !  When  thou  hast  had  a  few  more 
merry  hours,  and  but  a  few  more  pleasant  draughts,  and  a  little 
more  of  the  honors  and  riches  and  pleasures  of  the  world,  thy 
portion  will  be  spent;  and  then  of  all  thou  soldest  thy  Saviour 
and  salvation  for,  nothing  will  be  left  but  the  heavy  reckoning. 

“  Once  more,  in  the  name  of  the  God  of  heaven,  I  shall  do 
the  message  to  you  which  he  hath  commanded  us,  and  leave  it  in 
these  standing  lines  to  convert  or  condemn  you.  Hearken,  all 
you  that  mind  not  God,  and  have  no  heart  for  holy  things!  Heark¬ 
en,  all  you  that  by  sinning  in  light  have  sinned  yourselves  into 
infidelity,  and  do  not  believe  the  word  of  God!  He  that  hath 
an  ear,  let  him  hear  the  gracious  yet  dreadful  call  of  God!” 

“Reader,  I  have  done  with  thee  when  thou  hast  perused  this 
book;  but  sin  hath  not  yet  done  with  thee,  and  Satan  hath  not 
yet  done  with  thee,  and  God  hath  not  yet  done  with  thee.  As 
ever  thou  hopest  to  see  the  face  of  Christ,  the  Judge,  and  of  the 
majesty  of  the  Father  with  peace  and  comfort,  and  to  be  received 
into  glory,  when  thou  art  turned  naked  out  of  the  world,  I  be¬ 
seech  thee  to  hear  and  obey  the  call  of  God. .  He  that  hath  an 
ear,  let  him  hear  the  call  of  God  in  this  day  of  his  salvation.” 

Such,  with  slight  alterations,  is  the  way  in  which  this  holy 
man  of  God  addressed  the  men  of  his  times.  Nothing  that  I 
could  hope  to  write  would  breathe  such  tenderness  and  solemnity 
and  persuasive  power  as  this;  and  therefore  I  have  chosen  rather 
to  transcribe  it,  that  it  may  speak  in  my  stead. 

Now,  fellow-sinner,  in  God’s  name  I  send  you  this  book  to 
give  you  one  more  warning  of  that  coming  wrath,  from  which 
there  is  but  one  way  of  escape.  It  shows  you  that  human  proba¬ 
tion  is  a  serious  and  tremendous  matter;  that  God  is  greatlv  in 
earnest  in  pressing  the  call  to  repentance,  and  that  the  most  stu¬ 
pendous  sin  possible  or  conceivable  is  that  of  slighting  the  offers 
of  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ;  and  that  if  slighted  to  the 
last,  there  will  be  no  way  of  escaping  the  dreadful,  endless 
penalty. 

Hear,  therefore,  the  warning  voice  of  God:  “Turn  ye,  turn 
ye,  for  why  will  ye  die?”  Hear  also  the  despairing  cry  of  his  in¬ 
finite  tenderness  and  benevolence,  if  you  persevere  in  sin  to  the 
last:  “How  shall  I  give  thee  up?  My  heart  is  turned  within  me; 
my  repentings  are  kindled  together.” 


218 


Dr.  Bushnel's  Theory.  * 

Dr.  Bushnel's  Theory  in  respect  to  the  future  of  the  universe,  as 
developed  in  his  “  Nature  and  the  Supernatural,”  is  this  : — He  assumes 
that  ‘  ‘  every  attempt  to  establish  a  moral  being  in  the  law  of  liberty  and 
spontaneous  obedience,  will  be  at  first  a  failure;  ”  that  the  angels  of 
heaven  have  sinned  and  been  redeemed;  and  that  “  there  is  some  ante¬ 
cedent  necessity,  inherent  in  the  conception  of  finite  and  begun  exist¬ 
ences,  that,  in  their  training  as  powers,  they  should  be  passed  through 
the  double  experience  of  evil  and  good,  fall  and  redemption;  ”  (p.  182) 
thus  making  it  impossible,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  to  confirm  a  newly- 
created  being  in  holiness  without  a  previous  experiment  of  sin. 

This  commits  the  universe  forever  to  the  incursions  of  sin  with  the 
plan  of  Redemption  so  coming  in  as  eventually  to  deliver  the  sinning 
ones  from  the  guilt  and  power  of  transmission. 

But  the  assumption  that  sin  is  to  contaminate  all  created  beings  in 
all  worlds  forever,  is  repulsive,  and  throws  a  dark  shadow  upon  the 
future  of  the  universe.  We  shrink  from  such  a  view,  and  have  endeav¬ 
ored  to  escape  it  by  an  equally  plausible  and  more  satisfactory  plan  as 
we  regard  it,  which  is  developed  in  the  preceding  pages.  In  the  plan 
developed,  the  distinct  points  of  difference  are  the  following: 

1.  In  the  plan  of  Dr.  Bushnel,  sin  will  be  forever  invading  the 
universe.  In  the  foregoing  plan  the  progress  of  sin  will  eventually  be 
arrested  by  the  increase  of  motives  created  by  God’s  dealings,  in  the  way 
of  judgment  and  mercy,  with  moral  beings  who  have  already  sinned. 

2.  In  the  plan  of  Dr.  Bushnel  the  Atonement  is  a  provision  to  de¬ 
liver  moral  beings  from  the  power  of  sin  committed — the  sin  which  all 
newly-created  beings  will  commit  hereafter  and  forever.  In  the  fore¬ 
going  plan,  the  influence  of  the  Atonement  comes  in  to  prevent  them 
from  committing  it. 

3.  Dr.  Bushnel’s  plan  contemplates  an  experience  for  all  newly- 
created  beings  hereafter  and  forever,  similar  in  its  main  features  to  that 
gone  through  with  by  the  forgiven  sinners  of  this  world,  with  all  the 
accompanying  guilt,  remorse  and  conscious  degradation,  as  well  as  the 
severe  and  painful  discipline  and  suffering  necessary  to  deliver  the 
human  soul  from  the  power  of  its  own  sinfulness,  and  from  which,  after 
all,  it  is  “  scarcely  saved.” 

The  present  plan  escapes  all  this,  in  that  it  represents  sin  as  ex¬ 
cluded,  by  the  increase  of  motives,  from  the  experience  of  all  beings  who 
will  be  created  after  the  winding  up  of  this  world’s  history. 

*  This  should  be  read  in  connection  with  Dr.  Bellamy,  as  expressed  on  p.  1G8. 


/ 


;  !  ■ 

% 


■  / 


' 


' 


■ 


.  . 

|f:  ■  • 

/ 


II  .  1  • 
. 


